Harshly scored intelligence test

[RichardCranium]

Actually, I've just realised that's a more interesting question than I first though. At first I thought it would be an average based on previous users' scores, and hence the test would get progressively more aggressively scored the more CUK users used it

But they want to use this data for some research or other, so presumably they would have to go back to the raw data and rework out new averages at some point. And the score shown to participants would be a bit of a guess (and if the test opened up the wider population scores rise markedly I expect). But I guess all intelligence tests have similar problems.

Those choosing to do the on-line test are self-selecting snd so not suitable for determining a national average.

[TimberWolf]

Those choosing to do the on-line test are self-selecting snd so not suitable for determining a national average.

True. Maybe the current average is based on the monkey scores.

[d000hg]

I cannot do 4/12, I just see lots of patterns. I wish it would give me the answers.

[TimberWolf]

I cannot do 4/12, I just see lots of patterns. I wish it would give me the answers.

Take a screen print? Which one's that? I think the one I would have most trouble improving on its the squares without numbers, where you have to remember the order they light up. 5 is about my max unless a nice pattern shows up. Many of the others are trainable or techniques could be used IMO. Also, I didn't get around to seeing how they score it. For example is it better to risk guessing incorrectly using little time, or to take longer and improve the chances of being right?

[TimberWolf]

I had another go this morning and my scores have improved a bit. Best was top 2.6% on the coloured words test, where I didn't get a single one wrong, I just need to work on speed a bit. From being my worst the first time, it's now my best. Worst was visual attention, although I did well in that the first time.

[TimberWolf]

I cannot do 4/12, I just see lots of patterns. I wish it would give me the answers.

I only got top 12.7% in that, but I think what you're missing is a "last man standing standing" strategy. Some of them just pair up, triple up etc, and you're often left with one that doesn't match up to any other.

[d000hg]

Take a screen print? Which one's that? I think the one I would have most trouble improving on its the squares without numbers, where you have to remember the order they light up. 5 is about my max unless a nice pattern shows up. Many of the others are trainable or techniques could be used IMO. Also, I didn't get around to seeing how they score it. For example is it better to risk guessing incorrectly using little time, or to take longer and improve the chances of being right?

The ones with lives, I can't remember but does your score go down when you lose a life? I keep getting the case I pass on 6, fail on 7, round and round. I wondered if you can strategise based on having an odd number of lives.

First time round, I figured it was about thoughtfully considering questions... 2nd time round I realised speed was much more a big deal. Shame you have to register a new email to start over IIRC, and they didn't seem to send me an email with results.

[Scrag Meister]

I'm not convinced where they get their averages from, an 'average joe' would struggle to even understand the questions in some cases. Or is average of those who participated?

Best was top 6%. Worst was 'top' 84%.

Probably the average of the folks who have taken the test.

I barely understood the tokens in the boxes question (10?), but still managed just above average.

[RichardCranium]

they didn't seem to send me an email with results.

Nor me.

[TimberWolf]

The ones with lives, I can't remember but does your score go down when you lose a life? I keep getting the case I pass on 6, fail on 7, round and round. I wondered if you can strategise based on having an odd number of lives.

First time round, I figured it was about thoughtfully considering questions... 2nd time round I realised speed was much more a big deal. Shame you have to register a new email to start over IIRC, and they didn't seem to send me an email with results.

Yeah, I wondered whether it would be better to stick with 6 or 7 on one or two of them, rather than risk an almost certain hit in getting it wrong on the next round near when the time is running out.