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.
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.
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.
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...
Slashdot Mirror
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
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
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
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