Online Test Measures Speed of your Brain

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.'"

Comments

64-bit owners too smart

[XanC]

We who use 64-bit browsers already know we're smart! We don't need (and can't use) this test.

I still can't decide if the absence of 64-bit Flash is a blessing or a curse...

Re:64-bit owners too smart

[zuluechopapa]

for what it's worth.. it's not flashtastic, it's shockwave.. so (as far as I'm willing to try to figure out for myself) it won't work under 32 bit linux browsers (or.. ones that I'm willing to run.. specifically firefox) either. oh noes. there's blood in my alcohol supply. quickly, more beer.

Re:64-bit owners too smart

[Prof.Phreak]

It's a blessing.

I too have yet to see many online advertising :-)

Re:64-bit owners too smart

[baadger]

And those of us even smarter have downloaded/built a 32-bit copy of our favourite browser and installed the compat libraries and installed flash...or installed gplflash.

Re:64-bit owners too smart

[kimvette]

Oh, really? Installing gplflash allows you to run Shockwave applets?

Problems

[BWJones]

Problem: The linked test only works with Windows...... So, never mind.

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

[Anonymous Coward]

only windows users have brains???? I'm not sure because I am a mac user.

Re:Problems

[mikefrommcmurray]

Me, too. Obviously we know we're smart. We just don't know if we're fast and smart.

Re:Problems

[u-238]

They say that by practicing it pushes your brain to speed up ... our scientists believe this will lead to quicker thinking, faster responses, and fuller understanding.

I know that (forgive my sweeping ignorance) memories are forged by neural pathways being reinforced by repition; and we're all familiar with plasticity, eg blind people who acquire acute hearing as a way of coping with their loss by "exercising" the parts of the brain that deal with hearing.

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.

This study will examine whether blind people develop changes in the brain that improve memory function. Previous studies have shown that blind people, on average, perform better in memory tasks than sighted people. A possible reason for this is that parts of the brain that process visual information in sighted individuals are engaged in processing mnemonic (remembering) information in blind people.

Your thoughts BWJones?

Re:Problems

[BWJones]

we're all familiar with plasticity, eg blind people who acquire acute hearing as a way of coping with their loss by "exercising" the parts of the brain that deal with hearing.

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

[BWJones]

only windows users have brains???? I'm not sure because I am a mac user.

If it makes you feel any better, this neuroscientist also prefers a Mac. :-)

Re:Problems

[Illserve]

My thoughts?

I smell an astroturfer.

Re:Problems

[blakestah]

I may be uniquely qualified to comment on this, as I spent the last decade of my life, until last October, working closely with Dr. Merzenich on issues of how the brain is altered by reinforced behaviors, and know the details of the testing that has, so far, gone into their program to address age-related cognitive decline.

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 demonstrate that practicing certain types of computer guided behaviors for about an hour a day, every day, can have a fairly enormous impact on age-related cognitive decline. Attention and vigilance in rewarded behaviors, nothing more.

And you might wonder where this guy, Merzenich, gets off thinking this...well, here are some resume highlights.

1) Developed the ONLY US-developed cochlear implant at UCSF. Merzenich was the project head. The head engineer (Loeb) went to Advanced Bionics to continue the work that became the Clarion cochlear implant, and cured Rush Limbaugh's deafness (I kid), This work was led by Merzenich, and there was a team of about 6-8 other integral participants.

2) Provided a cure for the vast majority of language learning impaired children, which then became the company Scientific Learning, which has trained over 600,000 children at speech skills, with an AVERAGE improvement of 2 standard deviations in the six week training period. This is today far and away easily the most effective, and often recommended, program for children aged 4-10 who are diagnosed language learning impaired/dyslexic (partnered with Paula Tallal in this effort, as well as a team of at least a dozen other PhD scientists).

3) Member, National Academy of Sciences.

This one definitely works also. Is it a fountain of youth? Will it succeed in the market? Your guess is probably as good as mine. But for certain in the initial short-term, people who have substantially advanced cognitive decline relative to their peers can lose a decade or more of their age-related loss in a several week long training period. And that is worth getting excited about.

Re:Problems

[blakestah]

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.

It is quite easy to pose the pundit.

Controlled scientific studies show over a decacde-equivalent improvement in age-related decline.

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?

Re:Problems

[BWJones]

I may be uniquely qualified to comment on this, as I spent the last decade of my life, until last October, working closely with Dr. Merzenich on issues of how the brain is altered by reinforced behaviors, and know the details of the testing that has, so far, gone into their program to address age-related cognitive decline.

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 that define Alzheimers.

No, not the cellular/molecular pathology per se, but the cognitive decline in Alzheimer's is of interest, yes? From the website: "Early-Stage Alzheimer's Disease: We are conducting a pilot study with UCSF in early-stage Alzheimer's disease. This study is currently enrolling participants through the UCSF Memory and Aging Center."

What has been done so far, is to demonstrate that practicing certain types of computer guided behaviors for about an hour a day, every day, can have a fairly enormous impact on age-related cognitive decline. Attention and vigilance in rewarded behaviors, nothing more.

Absolutely. I am not refuting this, rather I am saying that it could be surmised that an equivalent degree of mental exercise doing a number of real world tasks could have the same effect.

And you might wonder where this guy, Merzenich, gets off thinking this...well, here are some resume highlights.

I was not questioning the credentials (or yours for that matter). I was simply pointing out that one does not necessarily need a $500 piece of software to limit age related cognitive decline.

But for certain in the initial short-term, people who have substantially advanced cognitive decline relative to their peers can lose a decade or more of their age-related loss in a several week long training period. And that is worth getting excited about.

I have no doubt. The brain, just like any biological system, gets "better" with use/reinforcement.

Re:Problems

[BWJones]

It is quite easy to pose the pundit.

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

[Illserve]

I think he is the author.

that or a business partner of some kind

Re:Problems

[blakestah]

No, not the cellular/molecular pathology per se, but the cognitive decline in Alzheimer's is of interest, yes? From the website: "Early-Stage Alzheimer's Disease: We are conducting a pilot study with UCSF in early-stage Alzheimer's disease. This study is currently enrolling participants through the UCSF Memory and Aging Center."

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. That being the case, today, early Alzheimer's from a clinicians point of view is the same as age-related decline.

But there is a lot of age-related decline that is not well explained by Alzheimer's also.

And, whereas the literature is full of indications that reinforced behavior can help age-related decline, there really are not studies that intervene and turn back the age-related decline. Certainly, mentally active people, people with more education, etc, all show less age-related decline. But to go in and reverse the clock is something else altogether.

And yes, many people would think that reinforced behaviors would have this impact. The difference is that by carefully choosing the behaviors, and highly controlled the feedback on reward, you can tap into the system much more powerfully. People often wonder why we can see such huge changes in the brain with 1-2 hours of daily training. Our canned reply is that we engage attention, vigilance, and reward to such an extent in that 1-2 hours that it can overwhelm the rest of the daily experience. Sensory exposure without reward causes some, small, amounts of change in adults. Sensory exposure in a rewarded context is a powerful agent for change in the adult brain.

Re:Problems

[blakestah]

I am completely financially disengaged, I don't work for them, don't work for Merzenich anymore, and have no conflict of interest with their work. I've just been around it a lot...

Re:Problems

[balloonhead]

Being a neuroscientist doesn't necessarily mean you have 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.

Just because you have a degree in something that most people know nothing about... means nothing.

Re:Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

it's so obviious that you bought this stuff dude

Re:Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple's customers are like no others--a rich blend of the most sociologically elite with those seeking elegant, simple computing... Unlike users of Intel/Windows computers, a significant portion of Apple's users are active , exploratory , avant-garde and early adopters . The activities they enjoy are unique in the way that they more often incorporate rich media such as video and music as well as more active prosumer behavior than many more passive Windows [and Linux] users.

a MetaFacts, Inc.

With above-average household income and education levels, the Mac population [is] very attractive [ intellectually as well as physically .]

a Nielsen/NetRatings (as quoted by C|NET)

Re:Problems

[BWJones]

Being a neuroscientist doesn't necessarily mean you have brains.

No, but it does mean that I study brains :-) More seriously, being a neuroscientist does mean that I have at least enough "brains" to get through a rigorous program and the tenacity to do it.

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 trying to say? Do you have *anything* constructive to add?

Just because you have a degree in something that most people know nothing about... means nothing.

Well, it means something to me and it means something to those who employ me and it means something to my colleagues with whom I collaborate. So, you will forgive me if I say that their opinion of my abilities matters more to me than yours. No offense intended of course.

Re:Problems

[Gentlewhisper]

>>
With above-average household income and education levels, the Mac population [atspace.com] [is] very attractive [ intellectually [atspace.com] as well as physically [atspace.com].

Noticed that the link you provided does not even show a good looking masculine male?

What does that mean... as a Mac user you are either a pussy or a fag? :P

Re:Problems

[x2A]

"only windows users have brains???? I'm not sure because I am a mac user"

Doesn't the fact that you're not sure say anything? ;-)

Re:Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Like mr neuro-bullshit scientist i reckon you don't know the difference between causation and correlation; none of your evidence adds up to a tinkers cuss in actual fact.

Also, for your info, I've worked in a somewhat more rigorous area of psychology for a good long while, and not one of my colleagues is foolish enough to use a Mac in their endeavours.

Re:Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

windows only?... lame indeed.

Re:Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Mac users are clueless knobs who don't know what to do with their money. When they see a Mac their pinhead brains go "Oh, SHINY!" and they buy it for their decor rather than functionality.

Posting as AC for folks who possess mod points but lack a sense of humor.

Re:Problems

[AlterTick]

so, what is it that you are trying to say? Do you have *anything* constructive to add?

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

[Anonymous Coward]

So, Mr. Neuroscientist what do you know about learning and memory (in human research)? Let's say from the developmental to aging related. And, how much of your research is related to cognition and perception? In fact, how much of that *literature* have you actually read.

If you're going to use a specific designation as a badge, then back it up with domain specific information.

Re:Problems

[Oxen]

I have no doubt. The brain, just like any biological system, gets "better" with use/reinforcement.

Funny, my liver seems to get worse every weekend.

Re:Problems

[hmahncke]

Hi,

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

[BWJones]

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

Re:Problems

[masterzora]

I guess it's like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle: You can't simultaneously know how smart and how fast you are.

Re:Problems

[KingSkippus]

For what it's worth, I don't know anything about neuroscience, although I've caught a few shows now and then on PBS about the brain and thought it was interesting. I knew accusations would probably fly that I'm trying to sell your software, but that really wasn't my intention. I just saw the article on CNet, took the online test twice, thought that whether or not the science behind it was valid it was nifty concept, and thought that fellow Slashdotters would enjoy taking a brief diversion to see how they do.

In fact, the last sentence of my submission text was stripped off before it got posted. It read: "So fire up your headphones or speakers and see how your test score compares to the average, or more importantly, to your fellow Slashdotters!" I submitted the story for amusement, not commercialism. My intention wasn't to help you sell your software, although if that happens because of the resultant interest, I'm ecstatic for you, because I think the test is a nifty marketing tool and you deserve some attention and yes, even sales for coming up with it. But more than anything else, I really posted it just because I thought the test was an interesting 10-minute diversion that others here like me would think was kind of cool.

But I've got to say, you coming here and responding to folks is most excellent, and your coolness factor just went up a notch or two with me and probably a lot of other folks, too.

Oh, and my two scores were 28ms and 25ms, which is way below (i.e. better than) the average and even the best of the best performers. I figure I'm either a super-genius, I've played way too much Halo, I have some sort of autism, or I'm just a reeeeally good guesser. If the first option is not the case, please don't explain because right now, I'm feeling pretty good about myself. ;-)

Re:Problems

[balloonhead]

I was merely pointing out that your implication of being smart due to your association with neuroscience is not necessarily true. I thought that by pointing out explicitly that this did not mean you were not smart (rather that it didn't prove you were smart either) would show it was a reasonable and fair point (which it remains). As another replied (to this same thread) - it was a follow on from the statement about Windows users having brains.

So I would say it was something constructive to add. It pointed out a logical fallacy. As you quite rightly pointed out, there are a range of smarts and a range of dumbs. I don't know where you are, and your post doesn't help either.

Of course, none of this stops me getting modded troll...

And don't worry - I won't take any offence. Of course your colleagues' opinions matter far more than mine - they know enough about you and your work to know where in the spectrum of intelligence you are. But the implication in your original post that neuroscience was a subject which inherently required you to be very intelligent to be involved in is clearly wrong - and that was the implication of your original post.(intended or not). The myth that subjects like neuroscience are only understandable by highly intelligent people is only there because most people know nothing about it all all... hence my statement of it 'meaning nothing' was not to say it meant nothing to those studying it, only that it still did not give any clues as to the intelligence of those same people.

I think you misread my original post as some sort of personal attack on your intelligence (despite the fact it was explicit in not being). Maybe your lack of understanding shows you are infact less intelligent than you think you are? Or maybe just a simple misunderstanding. Maybe I should ask your colleagues?

Re:Problems

[Walt Dismal]

I've used this company's software to retrain my brain and now I can write bad code 75% faster.

Evidence shows Microsoft has used it already for five years.

Re:Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually the page claims that my system doesn't have flash installed and I should follow their safe installation of that player.... Hmmm funny all the other flash pages I've been to work and what is that smell....

Re:Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure you do mate, sure you do. I'll bet that you're a bridge salesman, too. What exactly do you define as a "more rigorous area of psychology"? I'd ask if you had any credentials to back up your claim, but you've posted anonymously. I'm not terribly surprised. You're nothing more than an envious sous-chef hoping to upset the broth at the expense of the chef. If you can't add to the quality of the discussion, perhaps you should stay out of the kitchen. There's no room for you here.

What a joke

[gooberguy]

First, their test only works on windows systems. Secondly, it's just a ploy to get you to buy their stupid software for the low low price of $500.

Re:What a joke

[ostehaps]

And it's a dumb ploy at that: Giving me a score of 25ms isn't exactly going to motivate me to buy their product. They might as well take it all the way.

On the other hand, they could just be smart enough to recognize that people with as fast brains as me will see right through them anyway...

Re:What a joke

[Alsee]

Better yet, you can buy their software for $1000 and get a FREE Dell computer packaged along with it!

-

Re:What a joke

[jrumney]

First, their test only works on windows systems.

Not only that, if you have Firefox with the Flashblock extension installed, it sends you off to install Flash without giving you the opportunity to run the test.

fyi: not actually flash

[Anonymous Coward]

it's not flash, it's shockwave® which doesn't work on lunix and other superior operating systems. death to micro$haft!!! pretty ironic considering that most people with good "brain speed" would be using gnu/lunix already, lol ;-)

I guess

[rolfwind]

deaf people must be pretty lot in this guy's IQ scale....

Re:I guess

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, deaf people are a pretty lot.

Re:I guess

[Adult film producer]

Deaf can always just turn up the bass

But what if I'm smart enuf to see that it's bogus

[Harmonious Botch]

What if I'm smart enough to instantly recognize that this test is bogus?

Flash Applications

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[irimi_00]

OMG this makes me feel so stupid and incomptetant.

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

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG this makes me feel so stupid and incomptetant.

Yeah, your spelling should, too.

Re:OMG

[Lehk228]

that test fails to account for the fact that people get better at a task over time. it's results will be to show what the designers wanted to prove, that people are better at sorting old and bad vs young and good, but the results will be meaningless because it is a junk study

Re:OMG

[DirePickle]

They actually explain at the end that they have accounted for this, I believe. Whether they've done a good job of that is something else altogether, but...

Re:OMG

[StikyPad]

Some people get better over time.. some people get distracted.

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Yawn. The test is worthless because it relies on flawed assumptions. In particular, the FAQ claims that there should be no familiarity effects, since the faces are computer-generated, yet any face that is recognizeably Euro-derived will have characteristic Euro-features, and hence will trigger our greater familiarity with those Euro-features (due to their position as large-majority population of the US).

Since they not only failed to recognize that, but argued that there was no familiarity effect, I can't help but conclude that their study methodology contains enough other flaws to render it worthless as science. Good for pushing a point of view, maybe, but not science.

Annoying

[marcansoft]

The software is very annoying to install, it even requires a specific component for that test. I'm on a windows machine now anyway, otherwise I would not have taken the test (my usual PC runs Gentoo amd64). It's not even flash (which I can run inside a 32bit chroot under linux), it's shockwave.

Anyway, my score was 31ms. Age 15 here.

Re:Annoying

[jdub_dub]

25 ms, 20 years old. Eep! Very interesting test though, very cool.

Re:Annoying

[dunkelfalke]

39 ms, age 25

Re:Annoying

[PhraudulentOne]

26ms - 24yrs old. I don't really know how this benefits me though.

Re:Annoying

[marcansoft]

Down to 29ms, and I'm sure I can go lower.

Re:Annoying

[cl0nehappy]

30ms here, and 25yo. But it didn't ask how many Heinekens I have had today... which is 7. Does that factor in? =)

Re:Annoying

[PresidentEnder]

24 ms, 18. No heineken.

Re:Annoying

[Kaetemi]

31ms, age: 16

Re:Annoying

[Kaetemi]

27 ms this time

Re:Annoying

[Anonymous Coward]

32ms, 25y, 3 smirnoffs, 2 cigarettes.

Re:Annoying

[pintpusher]

you're all abunch of whippersnappers.

34ms, age 35, 3 fat tires, 1/2 pack of cigs, 2 bong hits, and Jimi Hendrix turned up to 11.

meh.

Re:Annoying

[mikiN]

30 here, age 36. Test taken while stoned, with trippy bleepy sweepy trance playing in the background, just for fun.

Re:Annoying

[Anonymous Coward]

32ms (first try). Ears well past their "sell-by" date (and they've never been all that good, even in my teens) at 58, cheap (SBL128) sound card. And while it's gratifying to see I match the "top performers" of any age, and beat the bejezus out of the average clown, and I'll happily agree that I'm smarter than average, somehow I doubt that this test is a very meaningful measure.

Re:Annoying

[Monkeys!!!]

Anyway, my score was 31ms. Age 15 here.

Pwned by a 15 year old.

*mumbles* story of my life.

Brain speed?

[gmerideth]

The flash component required to view "provides spacfic sounds" so the brain test didn't get past the spelling test before I cancelled it.

Re:Brain speed?

[KBAegis]

The editors were clearly part of the test. Shaddup. My mom's brain's faster than your mom's brain.

Re:Brain speed?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hehe, thats exactly what made me cancel the download as well.

Re:Brain speed?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not a spelling error! The sounds actually are spacific, which means they're both from space and teriffic. It's a perfectly cromulent word.

Hmm, accurate?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just noting that there were times near the end of the test that either no audio would play at all, or I'd hear a loud click - so I'd just have to guess at the tones. I still managed to get about half of them right when that happened (programmers have good pattern matching algorithms), so that probably coloured my score at the end.

For this test to be at all accurate, it would need to be done with something more reliable than shockwave.

Re:Hmm, accurate?

[hotair]

Sounds like you have significant hearing loss in the high frequencies. I say significant, because I was tested recently. I can hear almost up to 15khz, but not quite. That's pretty bad. But I could hear all the sounds in the test. Hearing only a click is symptomatic of continuous tones starting and stopping on a loud speaker, where the tones are out of your range, but the clicks of the cone kicking in and out at the beginning of the tone aren't. Or maybe something else happened. I'd get my hearing checked if I were you. Eh, what's that, honey? I can't quite hear your light feminine tones as you ask me to take out the trash... No hearing loss isn't all bad. I think it's a survival thing bred into the speciies by years of monogamy.

Re:Hmm, accurate?

[dunkelfalke]

that is strange because i have got the same click here but i am tested for up to 18 khz

Re:Hmm, accurate?

[smeenz]

I just reinstalled windows yesterday and I think my sound drivers are farked.. all of the 'how to use the test' sounds were fine, but as soon as the test proper started, all I got was clicks and short pips playing. Trillian seems to do the same thing when I get an incoming message - it's like the driver truncates the start of the sample and then tries to play catchup and messes it all up.

I'm pretty sure it's not my ears, cause it was fine yesterday before I reinstalled.

Re:Hmm, accurate?

[dch24]

I can't even get the test to run at all. I think it's a software problem, nothing wrong with his ears.

So of course, lets make it a competition :)

[Anonymous Coward]

So... anyone beat 30 milliseconds yet? :)

Because if everyone beat their "top performer" metrics, we'll know it's a scam for sure.

(flashbacks to Marges IQ episode)

Re:So of course, lets make it a competition :)

[marcansoft]

I got 31. Pretty sure I can do better the second time.

Re:So of course, lets make it a competition :)

[marcansoft]

third and last, 25ms. I'm pretty sure down here it starts to get close to the technical limit. I'll get some recordings of the waveform.

Re:So of course, lets make it a competition :)

[hyc]

If they're spitting out linear PCM then the audio can of course go to .02ms resolution. Probably there's no reason not to use PCM for such small sound clips.

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 fast bow triplet played at about 130bpm); they tend to blur on MP3 recordings. One of many reasons why I avoid MP3s...

Cognitive Psychology

[Anonymous Coward]

The people in cognitive psychology have been doing this - reaction time studies to build models of processing - for decades (to over a century).

Inspection time is also used in the study of intelligence. I haven't read the original article, but can confidently suggest that they have developed squat - just open your intro to psychology text book.

Incompatible...

[Cheesewhiz]

"We're Sorry. 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."

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...

[wordsofwisedumb]

I think you have some enemies Cheesewhiz. I chuckled a little too.

Re:Incompatible...

[chris_eineke]

DAMNIT! Why can't I get some friggin' SUPPORT here, people?!?

That's what Mac said when he encountered the website. Later Mac noticed that he doesn't even have a computer and went on a killing-spree. Let's all feel pity for Mac.

Poor Mac :-(

Re:Incompatible...

[BarryLoper]

Ah!, but if everything was compatible with Macs, would you still use them?

Re:Incompatible...

[thatguywhoiam]

I'm going to go spend some quality time with my Mac, playing Breakout.

Ok, who's going to tell him that he actually has an iPod?

Re:Incompatible...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ooo
I wanna read /. on my ipod too!

Re:Incompatible...

[ndogg]

You're not compatible with your girlfriends? Those might not be girls that you're dating...not that there's anything wrong with that--I'm just letting you know.

Re:Incompatible...

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, so these folks are trying to...what? Make us crazy? "...compatible with Mac's." Compatible with Mac's WHAT? Mac's necktie? Mac's decor? (I know, "Mac's" is a typo in this case. But would you buy anything from a dork who hasn't bothered to have someone competent proof-read their web-pages?)

Oddly enough...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oddly enough, many times I heard a completely different sound than the up or down sweep, brain bug or sound card bug?

Spacific?

[entrylevel]

The Shockwave application wanted to install a component so that my computer could "generate spacific sounds"... Anyone trying to sell me a brain tester damn well better be able to spell "specific".

Re:Spacific?

[Anonymous Coward]

I was more bothered that the website said that shockwave was "completely safe" (yeah right, as anyone who follows this knows). It also attempted to install the yahoo toolbar, and god knows what other spyware. Someone tell me why this was posted again?

Re:Spacific?

[Alsee]

No, they didn't misspell anything. They needed to use Macromedia Flash to generate space-ific sounds.

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?

[stungod]

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...

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[Sebastopol]

Four of my friends took it and we all got 27!!!

Something smells rotten in Denmark...

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[adolfojp]

I got a 27 also. This raises some suspicions.

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[Anonymous Coward]

So does this mean that I am smart, or that I'm just dumb faster?

Just remember, there are three ways to do anything: The right way, the wrong way, and the Max Power way.

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[updog]

I got 27ms as well!

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[JazzyJ]

23ms here.

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[Muerte23]

I actually got a 19. I had a two guesses (one wrong) where it actually made no sound at all because it was trying to play too fast. It seems to keep speeding up until your error rate hits some threshold.

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) score even more worried.

So at least 27 ms isn't a minimum score.

m

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[kuzb]

I got 21, what's your point?

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[AlterTick]

actually got a 19. I had a two guesses (one wrong) where it actually made no sound at all because it was trying to play too fast. It seems to keep speeding up until your error rate hits some threshold. 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) score even more worried. So at least 27 ms isn't a minimum score.

Yeah, I got 23 myself, also despite getting some wrong for the same reason-- though I missed some of mine because it doesn't indicate when it registers your first click and ended up doubling the first when I thought my touchpad missed it. Stupid crap test anyway. When we can score less than the lowest recorded score for any group, i suspect serious irrelevance.

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[Anonymous Coward]

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'm posting this Anon so people don't think I'm big-noting myself.

I have an IQ of around 150. Often in my personal and work life, people get annoyed with me because I apparently take too long to respond to questions and situations. Too long being, too long for their comfort it seems. But, I often achieve things which people around me (especially at work) are very quick to claim are impossible or overly impractical. I'm sure this is often because people think something will be too hard to do and then just give up without trying because of that. They're always shocked when I show that I've done it, after they've set it aside. It's a bit of a curse, because in IT you make enemies this way. In almost every job I have worked in, there have been long term staff members who have built up a name for themselves, by being quick to use the easy way out for themselves. This is not always the easy way for the company though, but management does not know this, because they come to trust the person who gets the problem out of the way. Usually this is achieved through steering management away from the problem, instead of addressing it or otherwise addressing it through outsourcing the problem, which ends up being expensive and ineffective. When I then have the problem solved, having quietly thought it through, those manipulative staff members see red. I've come to solve things quietly because so very often when I propose my thoughts on solutions, they get shot down in meetings by morons who are afraid of the fact that I can do what they are too afraid to try.

Anyway, I recently come into a role where a key person has noticed that when all the industry experts (shockingly, including professors) say "impossible", he waits for my well thought out answer to the same question, because I have provided him with solutions to some "impossible" problems time and time again. When other people are saying "impossible", I often am able to say, "I think I can do that" and I then have a great time with the new challenge. I feel like I'm a multiple architecture assembly language loving guy, in a World full of big talking VB programmers.

It seems that when some people realise that they are a cut above the rest, they are very quick to accept the first thoughts that come into their heads, because they think they are so smart. I think the smartest people are those who are willing to always question themselves and accept that they are not perfect.

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[Mashdar]

Seems that if you wanted to sell this miracle cure for degeneration of mental functioning then you would give everyone a score which makes them feel slow and senile...

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[56ker]

I got 109. I must not be awake yet today or something (which is kind of odd for someone in their 20s). :) However the fact I have Aspergers Syndrome probably has something to do with it as that's linked to central auditory processing delays. Maybe that's why I've had to ask people to repeat what they're saying (especially the ones with foreign accents) recently.

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[56ker]

Well I got 67 the second time I did it. Seems your scores improve with time.

Re:I got a 27...where's my prize?

[dave1199]

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?

Reminds me of the old Bill Cosby joke, in which Cosby said: "I asked a friend of mine why he took cocaine and he said 'it intensifies the personality!' and I said: 'but what if you're an asshole?'."

Not calling you an asshole, just saying you're very clever question reminded me of Cosby.

Advertising revenue ?

[bushboy]

So, erm, is Slashdot getting some of the old filthy lucre for posting bogus crud like this, so obviously in the same league as "test your IQ", albiet slightly more disguised.

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 ?

[adolfojp]

I have always considered the mind to be a byproduct of the brain. What is my proof? If you have brain damage your mind will not be as sharp. If your brain chemicals are not balanced, you will be kind of crazy.

Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways...

[Cheesewhiz]

Error Message from Site: We're Sorry. The current version of the Brain Speed Test is only available for Windows based computers.

If anyone was wondering why the average test score seemed a little on the LOW side...

Re:Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways...

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL!!! OMG! I was dinking teh same ding! Linux users are so 1337 it wud fux0r their scor3s! LOLOLOLOLOL

Re:Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways...

[user24]

erm that would be funny, except that for this test, a lower score is better....

Re:Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways...

[Surt]

That just made his post funny on a whole other level.

Re:Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways...

[paz5]

Maybe the constant pop-ups and spyware on Windows machines has kept those users mentally active?

Looks like a scam

[jerald_hams]

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.

Re:Looks like a scam

[Anonymous Coward]

I wrote a criticism above, but you're wrong. There is a growing body of research that suggests cognitive training is useful. Have a look at the research with aging populations by the Rotman-Baycrest research group and probably many more. Because you don't know doesn't make false.

If nothing else cognitive tasks exercise specific processes associated with learning, memory, and attention. In a related vein research exists that documents some of the protective effects of being bilingual or multi-lingual. Intuitively, there is every reason to believe that, well, cognitive training impacts on performance --- the organ responsible necessarily sees a benefit.

Article is wrong...

[dcapel]

It uses shockwave, not flash. Ergo, it is windows only. :/

Flame Bait?

[irimi_00]

How? I thought it was funny.

Using Flash to record time ?

[Anonymous Coward]

What exactly are they using to record the response time (flash actionscript ?).
I run a development flash shop and honestly I don't know getting time from script may not be that accurate (to the 30-50 ms).

deli

Re:Using Flash to record time ?

[KingSkippus]

I'm seriously considering copying and pasting this into about a hundred responses to posts here... RTFA!!!

The test does not measure your response time! It is playing sounds of pre-rendered duration and pitches, and you have to determine the nature of those sounds. Whether you almost instantly hit the button or take a few hours to ponder it, your score will be exactly the same! (Unless, of course, you take so long that you forget what your answer is...)

Again, RTFA, or better yet, take the test! It is not necessary for the script at any time to accurately record any kind of timing, and your response time in no way affects the results of the test!

Quick question

[Anonymous Coward]

How does fast input capability equal good long-term memory retention?

Also, what about deaf people? Are we to assume that inability to hear means one is dull-witted?

-57ms

[sh0dan]

Seems my clairvoyant abilities aren't as precise as I've been trying to tell my customers. :(

Score

[airjrdn]

I'm 36, and scored 27ms.

Re:Score

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, such accuracy, yet presumably based on stimulus from a display with a 100Hz or less refresh rate; or audio subystems with unknown latencies!

100Hz means 10ms for one cycle, so they can't meaningfully claim accuracy better than that size increment.

27ms - thats 2 x 13.5ms = 74Hz ... suspiciously close to 75.

old ...

[Lazy Jones]

a friend of mine wrote this a long time ago, it measures your reflexes too (and doesn't require some stupid windows software)

Re:old ...

[iotaborg]

The test you mention isn't the same as the test of this article; in the one you mention, there is a training period involved to determine which key is to be pressed. In this situation, one will improve time after subsequent uses (getting used to pressing which key for which input... if you've played DDR, you'll know what I mean), however in the test mentioned in this article, it does not appear there will be a training period.

Re:old ...

[de Selby]

That nasty thing's giving me huge differences in my times and accuracies depending on which keys and hands I'm using. Three left hand fingers on 123 are score suicide.

It seems to be more a test of one's affinity to the input method than a test of reflexes.

Flamebait??

[Harmonious Botch]

Maybe funny. At worst offtopic. But not flamebait.

Re:OMG, you insensitive clod!

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems it discriminates against...

Anyone who uses things other than Windows
People with lame reaction times
Deaf people and others hard of hearing
Those who say text terminals are better

I'm surprised that there isn't a lawsuit yet.

- Hey, when do the new 500 GHZ brains come out?
- Casemodding anyone?
- I'm deaf you insensitive clod! /silly?

Your destiny

[Anonymous Coward]

You will be hooked up to a beowulf cluster of other fast thinking individuals. Then we'll feed you with questions that can't be solved by computers, such as:

      * What's the meaning of life?
      * What was before big bang?
      * What does women actually want when they're silent?

Congratulations!

Woohoo 27

[brian0918]

It must be all the loud music I've listened to over the years.

Re:Woohoo 27

[brian0918]

I got it down to 23ms by turning up my headphones a bit.

Put on by idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

We are working a version that is compatible with Mac's.

Can you trust a intelligence-testing company that doesn't have English grammar skills at the elementary school level?

Re:But what if I'm smart enuf to see that it's bog

[Kijori]

Then you would have spelt 'enough' correctly... :D

Caution, may be hostile code

[Animats]

The web site tries to install executable code, in the form of a plug-in to Shockwave. Their own private plug-in, too, not one of Macromedia's. That's suspicious. They shouldn't need to do that for their little "test". It's a big plug-in, too. Even more suspicious.

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

[davidc]

I don't know about that, it didn't seem to affect my computer at al^%$#@#$%& NO CARRIER

Oblig. Homer Quote

[arrrrg]

So does this mean that I am smart, or that I'm just dumb faster?

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)

Obviously a confidence trick.

[Sir Pallas]

1.) Tell people they might be stupid.
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.

[Indras]

The scary thing is, this is exactly how the Church of Scientology recruits. They administer a free "Personality Test" to anyone who wants to take it. The test results ALWAYS have some "critical" flaw that is causing you to be unstable. If you don't fix it right away, you might just go insane. Fortunately, the Church has a remedy for your mental disease, if you just sign up for one of our free classes...

Re:Obviously a confidence trick.

[Anonymous Coward]

The test results ALWAYS have some "critical" flaw that is causing you to be unstable.

Like not wanting to come out of the closet? Or threatening to sue anyone who suggests that you might be in the closet?

Worse than an IQ test

[Don_dumb]

Really, after a while I just got bored. After finishing a good bottle of wine I got 407ms on this (I am 24). So I reckon I have the high score.
What does this prove? That my soundcard doesn't work or something.

Let me guess, the inventors of this test get very low scores so they must be geniuses.

Re:Worse than an IQ test

[madhippy]

106ms after ~3 beers ...

Re:Worse than an IQ test

[TapeCutter]

Thirty seconds, and I spilt bong water over the keyboard.

Hmm...

[Draconix]

We're Sorry

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!

Re:Hmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

And your brain is so fast you forgot to turn off bold after "Mac's."

More correctly,

[ScrewMaster]

it measures the speed of electronic funds transfer, if you're foolish enough to actually buy that program.

... hehe... I guess I am really fast then...

[Fallen Kell]

I got a 26ms response and I am 27 years old. Now if I can only figure out how this can get me a raise...

26ms for me...

[Fallen Kell]

Took it twice to be certain, scored a 27ms the first time and a 26ms the second...

Re:26ms for me...

[lynden]

Dang, 180 ms for me and I'm only 23 years old. My older sister suffers from MS.. I believe I have a minor case of it as well :( Never got the guts to do a check up though

I guess I'm too stipud...

[moabsoftware]

I guess I'm too stupid, because I don't have Windows or a processor faster than ia32 400Mhz. :(

speed of my brain?

[gEvil (beta)]

9.8 m/s^2

Re:speed of my brain?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh...that's an acceleration, not a speed.

Re:speed of my brain?

[Anonymous Coward]

Knowing the acceleration of your brain does not tell me its speed. You may wish to provide additional information.

Re:speed of my brain?

[gEvil (beta)]

yuh, i realized that right after i hit submit. whoops.

Re:speed of my brain?

[Lehk228]

speed is a function of acceleration over time, therefore i must assume you dropped your brain at the moment you posted.

Synchronicity and hamsters

[Anonymous Coward]

It's so funny that I should read this article today because something weird happened yesterday evening along the same lines. I was handling a hamster while my girlfriend was cooking up dinner. She accidentally dropped something and before I became conscious of the noise, the hamster jumped in my hands. This means one thing: hamsters process sounds much faster than humans. Well, this human at least...

Bad

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm doing pretty badly on this, with a 110ms average at 21 years of age.
Took me a moment to figure out why I'm so bad .. I'm absolutely tone deaf.
I simply can't tell whether a sound goes up or down.

Apparently, this makes me stupid .. Quite odd, considering I can tell whether a car comes closer or drives further (doppler effect) just fine .. I can play my guitar just fine (just can't tune it), I can understand people in conversation just fine.

Either this test is a pile of crap, or I'm really a lot more stupid than I think I am.

Test will not Work on Macintosh

[Shuh]

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 to show up from Microsoft.

How many screamers have claimed to do this?

[SirDrinksAlot]

How many screamers have claimed to do this?

It's not April 1st yet!

Darn

[Anonymous Coward]

My computer's brain isn't fast enough for this... the screens take forever to load!

I've got to upgrade my Pentium 75mhz...

geez

[bwave]

Ok, couldn't get site to run in IE7, Opera, Firefox, then finally got it work in IE7, even though Shockwave was already installed. Then it walks me through a 2 minute practice which bored me as it was, then some stupid 2 minute test of chirps. All to score 109ms... ok, so my 27 y/o self has the auditory response of a 65 y/o. Maybe I really am exhausted as I feel, I'm going to go take a nap.

Informative

[hdante]

The game requires Shockwave, not Flash. Hence, it doesn't work in Linux. It's good to write those things in the post, so that we don't have to follow the links.

Cause and Effect

[localman]

In your 20s, the average speed of auditory processing is 68 milliseconds. That number jumps to an average of 87 milliseconds in your 40s and 106 milliseconds in your 60s.

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? And would the 60 year old of today have scored as well as the 20 year old if he had taken the test 40 years ago? We'd need folks take the test in another decade to have a better idea of what this really means.

Cheers.

Test Failed...

[packetmill]

Dude, I'm like so smart, if I tried this little booger out I would DDOS their server.

PS:What is the point of these things? Ego. Pride.
Nonsense.

Re:But what if I'm smart enuf to see that it's bog

[Anonymous Coward]

He has.

No..

[packetmill]

Thats just how fast you accelerated before landing on your head when you were little. j/k :)

All up: Better than Average

[nurbles]

I was bored by the time I got to the actual test, but I clicked through, just to see what came at the end. I positioned the mouse where it would be over both the 'Start' and the 'Up' buttons so I could keep clicking without listening or looking. I'm 44 and managed to score a little better than average for my age group. Not sure what that actually says about the test, but it just didn't seem right to me. Oh well.

I'm stupider than dirt....

[3seas]

....oh wait, I'm on earthlink dial up....and not running windows....

Re:But what if I'm smart enuf to see that it's bog

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was bogus as soon as I saw flash+audio, and then results in milliseconds.

There is enough latency variation between different soundcards /drivers /versions of windows and flash to give at least a 5ms margin of error.

Too much jitter to be useable. That's why most people roll their own equipment for this kind of thing, or at least calibrate it properly first.

Define mind?

[TwilightXaos]

What do you consider the mind? Surely if when you say your mind will not be as sharp and you mean reaction time will go down, and/or answers to questions will not come as quickly, surely these could be aspects of the brain as well. Also, if the brain mearly affects phyical responses, how would you know if brain damage really affected the mind?

Bah!

[Godji]

WTF?! The latency ( != speed ) of a certain brain subsystem is NOT brain speed. Why? Because, as far as I know, brain speed is not defined! That's like measuring computer speed: you could measure the performance of the computer/brain at a given task but that says nothing about its performance on a different task. What is computer speed? The frequency of the CPU, the efficiency of the CPU, the input/output throughput, or the RAM latency? The same problem holds for defining brain speed as well.

Besides, being a somewhat experienced programmer (and by no means a guru), I could write the same program and release it for free (given the same amount of probably freely available scientific knowledge and a month or two of time). Why charge $500? If you ask me, they want to cover their rather low production costs with 5 sales or so...

Also, what's that nonsense about improving something by testing it? Short of the exercise performed during the test, this makes no sense whatsoever!

Re:Bah!

[Malawar]

people seem to fail to realize this is not testing latency. It plays a series of "sweeping" sounds that go from low pitch to high or vice versa, and different speeds. It tests whether your brain is fast enough to recognize which direction the sound is sweeping (up or down), not how fast you can click a button. SO, it matters not how fast you can click, as long as you can hear, can recognize tones, and your OS is Win32.

The test shows that I'm an idiot...

[layer3switch]

Since my artsd (set on high priority, can you tell i'm using KDE?) lag with 1.5 second sound delay on wine IE6 w/ flash shockwave installed using Fedora Core 4 (kernel 2.6.15-1.1833_FC4smp) with mtrr register for nVidia 256M, I have scored only my mother can be proud of.

I am an idiot...

So....

[Anonymous Coward]

If I'm deaf or have a hearing deficiency, which means I can't process audible information accuratly or at all in some cases. I guess that makes me retarded?? Right.

Re:So....

[windowpain]

No, it means that this particular test cannot provide meaningful results for you.

There's a cardiovascular fitness test that measures how much distance you can cover in 12 minutes. If you happen to have a broken ankle or an artificial leg, obviously that test can't provide meaningful results for you.

All tests have limitations.

Got 25ms

[schroedogg]

Aside from the annoyance of all the requirements, this was a somewhat interesting test and it only took about 5 minutes to take. A few of the ones I got wrong I realized right away (for some they gave the exact same sound again). I could see how doing this for a while *might* increase our mental fucntion. Then again, I can think of a lot better was of doing that..

i'm 28 and scored 24

[Rooked_One]

and i'm hungover as well.... VERY hungover - split a fifth of patron with a buddy last night. I'm going to retake it tomorrow

seems to be just pitch recognition

[Anonymous Coward]

33 ms. My age - 55. Seriously.

I'm an amateur classical musician, and I have good pitch recognition for an amateur. That helps a lot in this test. Now pitch recognition is also a skill involved in speech recognition. I've read somewhere that, overall, speakers of tonal languages like Chinese and Japanese have better pitch recognition, supposedly because it's a part of their language and therefore the speakers get lots of practice.

Is this an indicator of overall brain speed? Of course not. Ability to do well on this test by recognizing pitches enables one to extract more information from sensory input, and any additional info is potentially valuable. But it's just one factor of many.

Latency

[Shawn Parr]

Sounds like a latency issue. Maybe 27 ms is the fastest it is capable of recording.

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:Latency

[Sebastopol]

That's a very good point: we all took it on identical T43p IBM laptops, with the same corporate configuration. We'll try again on various desktops...

bad interface

[amcdiarmid]

There were a few times when I was thinking about something else, and was not sure if I actually clicked on the arrows. Should be an indicator and undo: unless they think that people are going to do the test seriously and take their time. (This is only relivant to the double twits).

FWIW...

[Red_Chaos1]

28 years old, response time of 27ms. What do I get for handily besting their "Top Performers" for my age range?

Oh, and it's Specific, not Spacific, unless they're trying to invent a new word.

Bush Took This Test

[Master of Transhuman]

He's still waiting for the results...

Poor interface

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried the test, but found it won't allow you to click on up or down until the sound is complete. So my brain makes the split second decision and wants to answer and the test is holding it up. Very Lame.

Re:sucker

[Anonymous Coward]

What doesn't make me feel better is that someone who thinks their domain would confer anything on an OS, turns out to be another Mac user.

Would you feel any better if he had said he was a Linux user? If not, you are a Microsoft troll, if so, you are a Linux troll. Suck it!

Go ahead and swallow the hype; pay through the nose for a second rate product, all the while thinking that you are expressing yourself as an elite thinker.

He said he prefers macs, not that he thinks they are better for the rest of us, and that is entirely within his "domain".

The fact that you need to evangelize quite so much might perhaps clue you up to the fact that you need to inhibit the reuptake of your oxidase inhibitors i.e. get a grip ya pathetic little squirt.

Simply saying he preferred Macs is "evangelizing so much"? Perhaps it is you that has an inferiority complex and feels the need to attack someone who after looking at his posting history has been a significant contributor to Slashdot. So who are you, you anonymous little turd?

I didnt know people still use shockwave?

[Psx29]

Is there a reason to use it over flash anymore?

Re:I didnt know people still use shockwave?

[Breakfast Pants]

"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"
 
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?

[hyc]

That seems pretty unlikely, such a wide variance would make movies unwatchable on many machines. A variance of even a few milliseconds would completely destroy lipsyncing. I think you meant "hundreds of microseconds."

Re:I didnt know people still use shockwave?

[Breakfast Pants]

Ok, hundreds of milliseconds is a bit extreme. But "even a few" milliseconds is not. Consider that if a person is talking to you from three meters away, the speed of sound dictates that there is a delay of almost 10 milliseconds before you hear their voice. Your brain easily adjusts. I still don't buy the summary's (and presumably article's) claim that this thing measures anything, let alone the speed of your brain, with millisecond accuracy via a flash applet.

Re:I didnt know people still use shockwave?

[carlmenezes]

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.

Really? I'm sorry, but that simply does not make sense. If that is the case, then how do you explain games and video running smoothly? Audio latency greater than 100ms is noticable to the average person. Yes, there is latency that increases with buffering. But if you have worked with audio, you will know that you do not have to buffer a lot at all to be able to do simple things like mixing. If you want to do stuff like applying filter chains, then you still don't need large buffers - at least you dont need buffers that are large enough to drive the latency to hundreds of milliseconds. I'm sorry sir...your latency claims smell of exaggeration.

slooooowwwww

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, for them, my brain isn't slow enough to pay $500 for their software.

Re:But what if I'm smart enuf to see that it's bog

[Harmonious Botch]

I did the first time. But I'm smart enough to see that it means that 'bog--' gets chopped. :)

Brain Score

[Anonymous Coward]

In defense of those who say they only hear clicks, I can hear all the sounds no problem (in terms of frequency), but occasionally the second sound does not play at all, and you get a loud click instead of a tone. The first time I ran the program I had this problem once. The second time I had more problems.

Regarding the 27 millisecond thing, I imagine this is as low as it goes. The first time I took the test, I attempted only to distinguigh whether the sound was going up or down. That resulted in 34 milliseconds (I'm 30). The second time I took the test, I associated the overall sensation of the sound with various natural sounds I am familiar with, such as bird calls. I was able to "learn" to distinguish the sounds that I couldn't really tell the difference between.I did considerably better with the 27 millisecond score. This indicates that the hearing subsystem is separate from the higher centres of the brain which "analyse" the sound to determine which way things are going.

Of course the test is designed to trick you by playing a high sound then a low sound where the first is going down and the second is going up. You press up/down instead of down/up if you can't tell what the sweep is. Clever trick, but hardly convincing.

As for the $500 for their software. Pffft. Get real. Wouldn't shell out $5 for it.

52ms

[Viriatus]

i tried only once and had 52ms and i'm 26 years old It's better than average!

My action potentials are faster than yours

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't everyone have the same 'brain speed'.

It takes the same ammount of time for an action potential to complete in both newborns and Bob Hope (well maybe not Bob hope cause he's dead... but you get the idea). ...

This is a measure of Auditory Processing speed. Tests like these have been aroound for YEARS to test for Auditory Processing Disorder.

If this is a cure for APD. Why don't they market it to special education departments, psychiatrists, and the such?

16 milliseconds

[dch24]

The test seems to not have very good resolution at the low end. It's almost discrete, with scores > 30 ms, 27 ms, and then 16 ms. Oh, and by the way, it couldn't even get through the training in Firefox. Either the Firefox Shockwave plugin has bugs, or the software is incompatible with Firefox/WinXP. But it's obvious they never tested that. When I finally, reluctantly, opened Internet Explorer, it worked fine.

"Your score is 16 milliseconds
in auditory processing speed"

Actually, the lowest duration that you could get two distinct frequencies in the 800 Hz - 1000 Hz range would be 2*2/800 s (Nyquist Theorem). That's 5 milliseconds. And it would take a human a long time to train to that speed. 10 ms is probably as fast as anyone's motivated to go.

It's true that you can train your brain back to a high speed. But that doesn't reverse the effects of aging, it just dedicates more of your brain's diminishing resources to that one task.

Mac's

[Anonymous Coward]

We are working a version that is compatible with Mac's.

You know, you can have a brain the speed of a fucking Pentium 4, but it doesn't mean it'll be any good.

score

[Gendo420]

I got a score of 27 miliseconds, is that good?

1ms accuracy?

[yourhotneighbor]

Uh... isn't latency through the Windows sound drivers more than that?

In other news...

[theredmenace]

If your hand is as big as your face, you have cancer.

Mouse use speed?

[eMartin]

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:Mouse use speed?

[Xeriar]

The time it takes you to click does not modify the time. I got 22.

Re:Mouse use speed?

[AlterTick]

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, 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.

Re:Mouse use speed?

[fbjon]

Hah, 20ms here, with an extra clicking noise from the sound card everytime a sound was played for added distraction.

I ween, I ween! :)

Re:Mouse use speed?

[AWhistler]

Bummer. I thought I was good at 31, since their "top performers" were shown at 32. Of course, I got tired of the test near the end and made several mistakes....and on one of the tests I didn't hear anything!

Re:Mouse use speed?

[Cylix]

I managed an 87 (down from 100).

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?

[Alkivar]

Hearing ability seems to only be a small part of this test. I too have bad hearing (professional dj with hearing loss due to repeated sound exposure) 15% loss in my right ear compared to baseline 5% in my left. I got a 22 for a result (i'm 27).

Re:Mouse use speed?

[Pooua]

I heard the clicking noise a few times, too, but I assume that is due to defects in my computer, or my Internet connection. Sometimes, signals get cut off along the way, you know, and that's the sort of thing you hear when they do.

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 that sometimes, I can tell shapes of objects from the sounds I hear from them. I will say that most of my mistakes on the test came from a sort of auditory dislexia; I confused up and down. I could hear the difference, I just was confused about the direction.

Re:Mouse use speed?

[Pooua]

I went over to my shiny new Dell e510 and retook the test. I got exactly the same score the second time; 50 milliseconds. Again, I kept confusing up and down.

Re:Mouse use speed?

[rlbond86]

I got a 28. Sweet?

Re:Mouse use speed?

[fbjon]

Yeah, it can get a bit boring after a while. I just did it as quickly as I could, so I'd get through it faster, before my attention would start to drift.

Re:Mouse use speed?

[KingSkippus]

I question the seriousness of a test that's clearly there as a marketing aid for some dubious $500 "Brain Fitness" training software.

Sure, go ahead and question it. I didn't submit the story to earn money for Posit Science, though I certainly don't care if they get fantastically rich off of it. And I'll be the first to admit that I don't know beans about neuroscience, except what I've seen on Nova now and then. I'm totally unqualified to make a judgement on whether or not the $500 "Brain Fitness" training software is dubious, though it does seem to have some pretty big brains behind it, if you believe their reference page with over 50 neuroscientists and researchers.

But really, the main reason I submitted the story is because I thought it was a cool little diversion for 10 minutes, I thought it would be fun to see Slashdotters post their scores, and I thought it was an interesting concept that auditory processing speed may be linked to how your brain works.

P.S. 25ms and 20ms on the first and second times I took the test, respectively. ;-)

White Screen

[Doggan]

It seems to stop responding randomly on w/ Opera on Windows XP. The flash window just turns white w/ no buttons.

Re:OMG, you insensitive clod!

[Anonymous Coward]

WOrked fine with Firefox on Gentoo :P

26 ms :)

[apu95]

26ms, I'm 20 yrs old too :D

I'm happy with my score :)

I am not a neuroscientist

[jd]

My closest claim to fame was involvement in AMS research at Darebury Laboratory that was looking at the aluminium levels of Alzeimer sufferers. I also had very peripheral involvement in the research into the use of desfereoxamine in treating people suffering from aluminium toxicity (it can cause brittle bones, limit oxygen uptake, etc).

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 are many variables, some of which will depend on the individual, and I'm not about to trust the research of anyone on this subject without some damn good supporting evidence. The problem is, what constitutes good supporting evidence? It's only been in the past few years that people have discovered (through the use of fMRI) some of the underlying mechanics of phenomena they have largely been restricted to studying by reported symptoms alone.

There appears to be some correlation between Omega-3 and Omega-6 fatty acids and brain development, but nobody seems clear as to exactly what the correlation is, whether it's limited to childhood or not, how significant the effect (if any) is, etc.

With such uncertainty, and so many wild claims being made, it is hard to be anything but skeptical. I do not dispute the genuine researchers who do genuine good and who genuinely discover useful things about the mechanics of the brain. The problem is, it's hard to know who those people are. It's like listening to Art Bell's old show - you KNOW that some guests are genuinely brilliant, genuine scientists - but which ones?

Thanks

[ggogeta]

Thanks for this link man really apreciate :)

Re:Flash Applications- HOW DO YOU REMOVE IT??Aargh

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you uninstall the damn plugin. Yes I'm retarded. I'm also paranoid.

Sweet fraggin'!

[Webb21]

Sweet! 200fps! I can't be stopped!

You're all slow.

[Anonymous Coward]

I declare you all slow.

This is Shockwave, not Flash.

Test your speed now Slashdot. I'm headed to Digg.

/. has become nothing but old farts who've forgotten how to use the intorweb.

I got...

[cosmotron]

...52 milliseconds and I'm 18. I guess that is pretty avrage for my age group...oh well.

17ms

[b00m3rang]

And I've only had 3 hours of sleep in the past two days due to illness. No wonder I've got mad DJ skillz :)

science behind the test and the training

[hmahncke]

I am the Vice President of Research and Outcomes at Posit, which means that among other things, I work with the team that designed the on-line test and the entire training program. I'm also a regular slashdot reader, so I thought I respond to the two most pressing issues for this community:

1) no mac/linux version

2) download required

There both related to the same core issue. Absolutely precise (i.e., millisecond level) control over how the sound is delivered is required for the test, so we had to write an xtra into the Director code to put out the sound (Director wasn't really designed for that level of precision on its own). So 1) we're a small company and haven't rewritten the xtra for the mac or linux (but I am a mac user at home...), and 2) the xtra has to be downloaded.

If there are any questions about the science of the test or the training programs we're developing, I'm happy to field them in this thread.

Henry

Re:science behind the test and the training

[hmahncke]

I should add that of course everyone from slashdot is getting a nice low score - not because everyone here is a genius (although I'm sure that's true as well) but because the average age here, I'd guess, is mid-twenties, and people in that range score almost all score well. Slashdot readers likely score at the low (good) end of that population as well, relative to the average 20 year olds we've tested.

The training programs we're developing are aimed at the normal course of age-related cognitive decline, which generally begins in a person's 40's and progresses from there. So call your mom/dad/grandma/grandpa/favorite uncle and get them to take it - see how they do.

Henry

I'm 28, BTW.

[b00m3rang]

n/t

I definitely think musical experience plays a role

[b00m3rang]

I'm 28, and got 17ms. I've also played many different intruments over the years, and am a House DJ. For those not familiar with the genre, spinning House involves playing 2 (or sometimes 3 or 4) different records at once, keeping them all perfectly synchronized while mixing levels and EQ blending. I wonder if the ability comes from the experience, or if aptitude in that area made me more likely to get into music.

My Score

[jazzman251]

42

I've got more than mild hearing loss

[b00m3rang]

Being totally addicted to bass (inside reference), having had huge car soundsystems since 15 (yes, before I could even drive), and raving all night literally hundreds of times, I have noticeable (but not severe) hearing loss and slight tinitus. I got 17ms.

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:I definitely think musical experience plays a r

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm 23 years old and I got a score of 180 ms. My older sister is a sufferer of MS. After this test, I believe I may have it as well :(

It's a contraction for Macintoshes

[b00m3rang]

Maybe.

Director xtra

[Garridan]

An FYI: upon installing the xtra, the certification blurb indicates that the xtra is used to play "spacific" sounds.

I found it somewhat humerous that a company attempting to test my brain, didn't manage to catch a typo that had to be seen by dozens of eyes in testing.

As a programmer by trade, and student of math... I know that even the best of us make simple little errors all over the place. But it still tickled me to see that.

Thanks for taking the time to post here.

Great if you can hear....

[fuego451]

...and this is their only test for brain speed and their only product for increasing auditory/cognitive skill is, well, auditory.

I am 61 years old and I would like to know how my brain is working but this test wouldn't help me much because I have been losing my hearing over the last twenty or so years due to injury, infection and environmental noise. I have learned American Sign Language and 'talk' to several deaf friends to practice my new language.

The C|net article is nothing but an ad for $500 Posit software or an $1100 Dell computer bundeled with the Posit software, however, it does state that some researchers are using visual tests to determin brain processing speed which would be better for me. The Posit Science site doesn't have much to say about the science behind their software product.

Hopefully, someone is working on tests for those people who are deaf and blind to determin brain speed and or cognitive function.

Brain = parallel, so test must exploit this

[noidentity]

I haven't looked at the site (no Windows for me!) but I'd think brain speed is more a matter of the number of connections (i.e. parallelism) rather than the speed of the links. I get the idea that this tries to measure the latency of processing rather than the throughput. It would be like running a process on only one core of a multi-core system and claiming to measure the performance of all the cores combined.

Problem

[kl1k]

Even a deaf guy could get a good score. Fire up something like goldwave to view the sound waves and then you'll get the all the answers correct - does this mean I clever!!??

Brain speed or mouse speed?

[nysus]

Crank up the sensitivity of your mouse and see how that impacts your score.

Retarded useragent discrimination

[bcmm]

Can some IE user link to the SWF so people who can't be bothered with hacking a stupid user agent filter can see this?

I got 22 so I guess you need some new friends...

[Joce640k]

I got 22 so I guess you need some new friends...

207 is good. Right?

[pezzm4n]

My audio popped and crackled a lot during the test making it hard to hear what was playing, so I just guessed on half. Anyone else have this issue, or are I not genius?

methodological curiosity

[ilikedonkeykong]

Sorry to be picky, but since Posit Science claims millisecond resolution on their measure, I'm curious as to how their timing routine works. I realize that how fast a person clicks doesn't matter:

Note: You can take your time responding. It does not matter how fast you click your mouse.

However, as a response-time-oriented cog sci guy (not a neuroscientist), I know that there are two issues with timing routines. First, if the experimental control program uses the system timer then you only get 55ms precision. Second, and more difficult to handle, is the problem of having many participants running multitasking environments (Windows). Thus, whatever processes are running in the background could affect the precision of your measure. Then again maybe you have some ingenious way of controlling for these problems due to the fact that how fast the participant clicks does not matter. I know that I would be interested in doing my experiments online if I didn't have to worry about these issues.

Re:methodological curiosity

[hmahncke]

Thanks for your interest -

1) The only part that requires millisecond level precision is the production of the two FM sweeps and and quiet period between them. I'm not quite sure how to answer your question (and others here) any better than that - once it's clear that it's not response time that we're trying to measure with ms precision, I hope it makes sense that sending a single array representing the sound waveform (2 FM sweeps and the quiet period between them) to the sound system without introducing any jitter is relatively straightforward.

2) In a on-line version there is no control, of course, over what else the user is doing, so it is possible that other processes will interfere with the timing and reduce the accuracy of the test. Several people here have commented on hearing clicks and so forth, which could be do to this. There's nothing to be done about it. When we collected our normative data, we did it with participants in front of our computers in our lab to ensure that no extraneous processes contaminated the data set.

Henry

Anyone else...

[Aneurysm]

...feel like they were having an argument with R2D2?

install....?

[punkguitarist]

Sorry, But not installing anything.

Windows Only

[ABoerma]

Of course the brain test's not compatible with Macs. Mac users Think Different.

crap 1200 baud

[Anonymous Coward]

Talk about my brain being slow.....

Re:But what if I'm smart enuf

[scwizard]

What if I'm smart enough to instantly recognize that this test is bogus?

Psst, don't tell anyone else, but that was actually the real test, and you passed. Our underground agents will contact you shortly.

The implication is obvious....

[Coppit]

They only offer a Windows version because they are targeting the largest group of people with brain problems.

we live 0.3 seconds in the past

[peter303]

I was just reading the current SciAM issue about Time that it takes three tenths of a second for out conscious brains to perceive a sensation. So we are perpetually 0.3 seconds in the past compared to the real world. Sigh.

F*** Shockwave... and this 'test'

[aqk]

OK, so I only have a 32-bit Windows XP with ALL the updtaes, and a gig of memory, and 440gig of diskspace. But this Macrom.. uhh ADOBE attempt at downloading some shocking thing blew my IE out of the water.

    I didn't know shockwave was still being used; I thought my flash payer plugin for IE and Firefox was all I'd ever need!

      Brains. Who needs 'em?

Anybody else get 30ms in 30yr old range?

[Kodack]

I found the test to be pretty easy, having a musical ear and listening to a lot of mandarin. I think people who speak tone based languages like Mandarin and Cantonese are at an advantage for this test.

Anyway, I scored 30ms and the lowest they showed on their site was 34 for my age group. I'm curious how others did.

My friend tried it and he couldn't tell the difference between the up note and the down though so if your tone deaf the test won't work.

It doesn't test reflexes

[Kodack]

The time it takes you to click the buttons isn't factored in. It's whether your ear can tell the difference between two quick down or a quick up down a few miliseconds apart. The time it takes you to click has no affect.

And all the test really judges is your ability to process sounds that are rapidly strung together. Anybody who can understand what the Pikey is saying in "Snatch" should have no problem with this test.