Interactive computer program for measuring and analyzing mental ability

An interactive automatic system and technique for measuring and training of mental ability. In the illustrative embodiment, the invention is implemented on a computer which automatically presents a variety of visual and auditory stimuli. The system then measures reaction to the stimuli, adjusts certain stimulus parameters, and provides scores in response thereto. The scores are tabulated and displayed for analysis. In particular embodiments, the invention tests for physical reaction time, perceptual awareness thresholds, attention level, speed, efficiency and capacity of information processing by the brain and elementary cognitive processes, including memory, memory access and decision-making speed. The invention measures, identifies and quantifies noise in the subject's brain and elementary cognitive processing system, and the information exchange rate between the subject's left and right brain hemispheres. The inventive system compiles a history of the test scores, renders an overall performance rating, and delivers comments based on the subject scores. The complexity of the tests are adjusted based on the scores to optimally challenge cognitive capacities, thereby rendering more accurate evaluations of cognitive capacity, and optimizing learning of desired improvements in perceptual, physical and mental response speeds and efficiencies.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
1. Field of the Invention 
The present invention relates to 0 computer based testing systems. More 
specifically, the invention relates to systems and methods for measuring, 
analyzing and training improvements in mental ability. 
2. Description of the Related Art 
Scientists and psychologists have long sought an objective measure of 
general mental ability that is independent of cultural bias 
(acculturation). Most pen and pencil PSYCHOMETRIC ("IQ") tests (e.g., 
Stanford Binet and Wechsler) are biased to the degree that their questions 
favor prior learning of: procedural skills (e.g., use of math tables 
enabling faster solutions), strategies (e.g., how to solve certain 
problems), and language (e.g., alphabet, vocabulary, colloquialisms). 
Although IQ tests purport to measure native mental aptitude, or ability, 
per se, a growing percentage of educational and cognitive psychologists 
have argued that, "individual differences in tested IQ are attributable to 
differences in the opportunities afforded by the environment for acquiring 
the specific skills that are called for by the standardized tests of 
intelligence". 
In an attempt to identify a common factor that accounts for individual 
variations across a broad range of mental tests, scientists have 
constructed the term `g`. The degree to which any test reflects native 
intelligence, or mental processing skills, versus acculturated learning, 
is its g-factor, or g-correlation. 
A `g-factor` score results from a factor analysis of a wide range of mental 
ability tests, and relates to those components of the tests that are most 
highly correlated in their predictability of test results. However, 
although g is often used as a synonym for IQ, in fact, it is not a measure 
of any kind of knowledge or mental skill. That is, g is not related to 
cognitive content g reflects cognitive capacity, that is, information 
processing capacities (speed, capacity and efficiency). The knowledge and 
skill content of performance on mental ability tests is merely an 
expression of g which reflects the overall capacity of information 
processes by which knowledge and skills can be learned and effectively 
applied, such as, in an IQ test. 
Over the past 20-30 years Cognitive Science has developed the theory that 
cognitive ability, i.e., g, is based on the brain's (information 
processing) speed. Studies have revealed high correlations between highly 
g-loaded mental tests (e.g, Wonderlic, Ravens and WAIS), and brain-speed, 
as measured via neural conduction velocity (optic-nerve transmission 
speed), and chronometric (reaction speed) cognitive tests, for instance. 
Underlying g, or basic intelligence, are elementary cognitive processes 
(ECPs) involved in every stage of cognition from perception to 
decision-making. More specifically, ECPs are comprised of the following 
components: the perceptual registration ("apprehension") of the stimuli 
(bits of information); the identification ("discrimination") of the 
information; the "selection" and "encoding" of the information, and the 
appropriate reaction, be it: physical (sensory-motor), i.e., "simple" 
reaction-time (RT), or; cognitive, ie, "choice", "discrimination" and 
"decision" RTs. Cognitive reactions involve the additional ECPs of; 
"rehearsal" and further "encoding" of appropriately selected information 
while, short and long term memory files are simultaneously accessed, 
followed by the "transformation" and "manipulation" of retrieved 
information for the purposes of making the appropriate choice, 
discrimination or decision response. Any test that challenges and 
quantifies elementary cognitive processes is referred to as an elementary 
cognitive task (ECT). 
A simple reaction-time (RT) test involves a single (sensory-motor) response 
when a certain event happens, such as, pressing a button when a light goes 
on. A choice RT test involves two or more possible choice responses. For 
example, "If a red light flashes on the screen, press the R key, and if a 
green light presents itself, press the G key." A discrimination RT test 
generally involves the use of short term memory to render a yes/no 
response. As an example, a string of letters is presented for quick 
review, quickly followed by a second set of letters, with the requirement 
that the subject determines whether any letter in the second group was in 
the first group and respond as quickly as possible. 
And, a decision RT test requires the access of short term memory and/or 
long term memory (LTM) in order to render the correct "split-second" 
decision. For example, the stimlus may pair a word with a picture on the 
computer. The Rule might be, "If the word and picture are the same, press 
the right arrow key, otherwise press the left." 
Although "simple," RTs show a relatively low correlation to IQ, choice (and 
especially) discrimination and decision RTs demonstrate a relatively high 
(over 50) correlation. In addition, the higher the number of alternative 
choices, or possible responses, the higher the test's g-factor. A primary 
indicator of the g-value of an ECT is the length of time required for a 
correct response. For instance, simple RTs are typically 275 milliseconds 
(ms). However, choice RT increases as a log function (to the base 2) of 
the number of choices (Hick's Law). Typically a four choice test might 
require 350 to 400 ms. In a decision speed test with a random 
rule-changing cue, response times typically exceed 1000 ms. RT times 
around 1000 ms indicate the full engagement of "Working memory" and are 
considered to be highly g-loaded. However, RTs much over 1000 ms typically 
reflect non-elementary (meta) cognitive processes, such as, `thinking` 
(computations based on learned strategies or procedures, generalizations, 
etc.). 
The functional processing-system serving the elementary cognitive processes 
is what Cognitive Science terms "Working memory". It is likened to a 
computer's central processor. The faster the processor, the smarter the 
computer and brain. 
The ideal mental ability test, therefore, would quantify as many ECPs as 
possible, that is from perception and simple RT, to choice and decision 
RT. 
In response to the need to eliminate cultural bias from the quantification 
of g a number of electronic and chronometric methodologies have been 
employed revealing various physiological signatures (electrical, chemical 
and metabolic) and information-processing capacities of the brain showing 
high correlations with g. 
Various test measurements revealing significant correlations with g 
include: cognitive chronometric (RT) tests including "Choice RT" and 
"Discrimination (decision) RT"; "neural conduction velocity"; brain (wave) 
evoked potentials; brain hemisphere coherence (integration, or 
synchronicity); total synchronous (alpha and theta) brain wave 
"energy-under-the-curve"; and others. However, none have shown the 
practicality, ease of administration and fundamental potential as the 
chronometric cognitive (RT) tests. 
Over 130 years ago Sir Francis Galton advanced the notion that "reaction 
speed" reflected general intelligence. One-hundred years ago American 
psychologist J. Allen Gilbert at Yale University was first to demonstrate 
a relationship between RT and intelligence. RT IQ correlation studies 
continued over the years. The modern era of choice RT chronometric 
intelligence tests started around 1952 when W. G. Hicks discovered that, 
multiple "choice" reaction times increase as a linear function of the 
increase in the amount of information presented to the subject, when 
information is measured in binary bits, that is, the logarithm (to the 
base 2) of the number of choices. This relationship has become known as 
Hick's Law. 
In 1964, E. Roth, using choice RT tests, found that individual differences 
in the slope of RT as a function of bits (i.e., the rate of information 
processing), are correlated with IQ. This was one of the first 
demonstrations of a relationship between (cognitive) response speed and 
intelligence as predicted by the general theory that, IQ tests measure, 
among other things, the degree of learning that results from one's 
information processing capacity. 
More recently, Steinburg, Nettlebeck and Jensen, working independently, 
have measured a number of assumed different ECPs (e.g., inspection time 
and dual discrimination RT) discovering that, the greater the number of 
different ECP components measured, the higher their collective 
g-correlation. 
To date most, if not all, chronometric research has been experimental 
rather than application oriented. In order to render the field viable as a 
mass population measurement system, the following are (minimally) needed: 
(1) a comprehensive battery of ECTs that quantify most, if not all, of the 
known elementary cognitive processes, components and mechanisms of 
cognition, including; perceptual awareness, brain processing speed, 
cognitive processing (choice and decision) speeds, working memory 
capacity, and speed of long term memory (LTM) access (from episodic, 
semantic and/or symbolic divisions of LTM), and the subsequent speed and 
efficiency of working memory's organization of relevant data to make a 
correct choice or decision; (2) a comprehensive battery of ECTs that are 
truly interactive, whereby test complexity (difficulty) is adjusted 
on-line, depending upon the speed, accuracy and consistency (efficiency) 
of the user's responses, in order that the task can optimally challenge, 
or "load", user's ECP (or, working memory) capacity to its maximum 
potential, and; (3) an automated computer program (or otherwise electronic 
device) incorporating such a battery of ECTs that can easily be run on 
almost any contemporary computer hardware. 
It should also be noted that the refined quantification of cognitive 
components that make up a more generalized mental ability might be helpful 
in aiding educators and employers to better qualify and place individuals, 
as well as address their individual cognitive strengths and weaknesses. 
In the final analysis there appears to be a real and timely need for a 
practical yet fair way to quantify intelligence, or g, and its 
sub-components, whose test results reflect those cognitive processing 
capabilites underlying "intelligence", and which are not influenced by 
one's cultural advantages or disadvantages, or even by one's genetic 
history which may have predisposed the nature of one's `intelligence` to 
be different than the qualities of intelligence deemed to be most 
appropriate for measurement by tests developed some 25 to 50 years ago. 
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
The need in the art is addressed by the present invention, which, in a most 
general sense, provides an interactive automatic system and technique for 
measuring and analyzing mental ability. In the illustrative embodiment, 
the invention is implemented on a computer which automatically presents a 
variety of visual and auditory stimuli. The system measures reactions (or 
lack of) to the stimuli, and provides immediate on-line feedback of 
results, while interactively adjusting test complexity to optimally 
challenge the cognitive capacity being measured. The system renders a 
number of useful measurements, based on proprietary manipulation and 
analysis of continuous data generated. Appropriate and meaningful 
cognitive scores are then tabulated, and displayed for analysis. 
In particular embodiments, the invention tests for: physical reaction time; 
perceptual awareness thresholds; brain-speed, and; the speed, efficiency 
and capacity of elementary cognitive processes, including choice, 
discrimination and decision responses, memory-access and 
information-retrieval. The invention also quantifies the subject's degree 
of focus or attention and working memory's speed of accessing long term 
memory files believed to reside in both left and right brain hemispheres. 
In addition, the complexity of the tests are adjusted on-line, based on 
individual test results, in order to optimize learning of desired 
improvements in awareness, attention and in speed and efficiency of brain 
and cognitive processes. The inventive system also compiles a historical 
comparison and analysis of the test scores, presents written comments, and 
provides a performance rating system all graphically displayed.

DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
Illustrative embodiments and exemplary applications will now be described 
with reference to the accompanying drawings to disclose the advantageous 
teachings of the present invention. 
While the present invention is described herein with reference to 
illustrative embodiments for particular applications, it should be 
understood that the invention is not limited thereto. Those having 
ordinary skill in the art and access to the teachings provided herein will 
recognize additional modifications, applications, and embodiments within 
the scope thereof and additional fields in which the present invention 
would be of significant utility. 
There is a growing consensus that elementary cognitive (information) 
processes, rather than learned cognitive content and skills, most fairly 
reflect native intelligence, or g. It has been relatively well established 
that information processing capacities accurately reflect real mental 
ability, and that info-processing test scores, such as, choice 
reaction-times, demonstrate high correlations with g. Furthermore, it has 
been clearly demonstrated that such information-processing capacities, or 
ECPs, can most easily, comprehensively and accurately be measured via the 
use of elementary cognitive chronometric tasks. And, furthermore, 
resultant RT test scores have been highly correlated to mental ability 
tests, especially those tests, such as, Wonderlic, Ravens, et al, that 
have a particularly high g-loading. 
In other words, it appears that the measurement and evaluation of 
elementary cognitive processes, which influence, if not enable and 
determine, learning, and which underly the cognitive expressions of 
intelligence, might render a more accurate and comprehensive analysis of 
raw mental ability. An analogy might serve here. Intelligence is an 
expression of the power of the underlying "muscle" of the brain. Physical 
strength is the expression of the power of the underlying physical 
muscles. To most accurately measure the power of a muscle, one would use a 
weighted, or otherwise resistively loaded, system offering up the maximum 
load that the muscle can move or lift. To measure the muscle's strength by 
(indirectly) testing the person's ability to heave a 16 lb. shot, for 
example, would be relatively inaccurate, since other factors, such as 
learned technique, practice, etc., also determine how far one could "put 
the shot". 
Likewise, an IQ test could be likened to a track meet for the mind. The IQ 
test score reflects factors other than merely brainpower. Therefore, a 
more accurate reflection of mental ability might be derived by directly 
measuring the brain's power output, that is, its computational speed and 
efficiency. 
It has been demonstrated that the elementary cognitive tasks (ECTs) which 
produce the highest g-correlated results are comprised of a battery of 
tests with: each evaluating a different elementary cognitive process 
(ECP); the battery measuring as many ECPs as possible, and; one or more 
tasks evaluating as long a chain of ECPs as possible. For instance, this 
might be a single test that measures perceptual thresholds, brain-speed, 
choice and decision speeds and efficiencies, short-term "working" memory, 
long-term memory access speed/efficiency, simultaneously. 
It is most likely that adding interactivity to such a battery of ECTs can 
further enhance the test's g-factor, since the true potential of any 
elementary cognitive capacity can only be revealed if it's fully 
challenged. 
To evaluate the full capacity of any ECP, the test must fully load working 
memory. WM is the operational component of short-term memory. It is 
likened to a computer's central processor. 
Working memory (WM) serves each of the elementary cognitive processes. 
Loading WM requires (interactive) response-based adjustment of test 
complexity to fully tax WM capacity to its limits (in processing speed, 
efficiency and memory capacity). For instance, WM has a relatively limited 
channel capacity. It can only efficiently process one task at a time. WM 
"capacity" is defined in terms of: its optimal processing speed (including 
memory retrieval); its processing efficiency (accuracy and consistency), 
and; its processing capacity ("memory", or amount of information it can 
successfully handle at one time). 
Interactive ECT complexity-adjustment, random stimulus presentation, 
uncertainty of stimulus type, random rule changes, psychological pressure 
for speed without errors (performance), positive and negative 
reinforcement of performance, psychological status for achievement, are 
all relevant factors that optimize WM loading, thus reflective of true 
cognitive ability. 
Likewise, the above factors also enhance the possibility of 
cognitive-capacity enhancement learning, especially if the user being 
tested is also provided individual trial-event feedback of results. 
Another example might serve here. Imagine trying to improve your game of 
darts blind-folded. Even if a friend reported where each dart landed, the 
lack of immediate, on-line, direct feedback makes improvement considerably 
more difficult. 
Therefore, the key to learned cognitive enhancement is based on: the 
immediate, direct, on-line feedback of appropriate result variables; the 
interactive adjustment of task dificulty so that the brain-cognitive 
system's main machine, Working memory, can be fully challenged (imagine 
trying to build muscle-power with a weight that can be easily lifted), 
and; challenging all of the brain's various elementary cognitive processes 
and their capacities. 
Finally, it would seem that chronometric reaction-time computer programs 
might offer a most desirable, non-invasive and practical way to test, 
quantify and train elementary cognitive processes, or mental ability. 
Although, historically, chronometric cognitive tests have demonstrated 
promising potential in experimental research environments, they have had 
limited market appeal and application potential for a number of reasons, 
primarily: (1) their lack of interactivity, (2) lack of comprehensiveness 
(a complete ECT battery is significantly more effective and engaging), (3) 
their inability to work with previous hardware (it has only been within 
the past few years that computer processor speed, and screen 
refresh-rates, have been adequate for the testing of perceptual and mental 
reaction-speeds down in the low millesecond range). 
In addition to the quick and equitable quantification of cognitive 
capacities known to underly intelligence, another valuable application of 
the invention would be the qualification of conditions such as sleep, 
alcohol, nutrition and drugs for their affect on mental/cognitive 
capacities. Simple reaction-time and dexterity tests, brain wave pattern 
analysis, bio-chemical analysis, subjective experience evaluation, 
behavioral pattern observations, and other measures have historically been 
used in an attempt to accurately quantify and qualify mental and physical 
performance altering "conditions". 
Unfortunately, conventional methods typically produce relatively gross 
analysis, especially regarding qualitative factors. For example, the 
accuracy of blood alcohol analysis as a measure of one's true condition is 
questionable with respect to an individual's actual reflexes, awareness 
level, etc. 
In another example, scientists currently researching the mental performance 
boosting affects of vitamins, herbs and pharmaceuticals, such as the new 
class of nootropic drugs, have no highly accurate, reliable and 
comprehensive way to measure the drug's true impact on elementary 
cognition, and its components. And, although memory recall and other 
conventional aptitude tests have been used with limited success, their 
primary limitation is the limited number of times they can be used in a 
relatively short time frame. Furthermore, these tests are significantly 
restricted in the number of different cognitive processes they can 
measure. 
One of the most desirable cognitive components to measure in the 
quantification of mental ability, is brain-cognitive efficiency. Recent 
use of PET scans (Haier, UC Irvine, Calif.), has demonstrated reduced 
brain metabolic rates with more intelligent people. That is to say, a 
smart person uses less of their brain, more efficiently, than a less smart 
person when engaged in some cognitive task. Efficiency is the relative 
ease, consistency and accuracy in performing a mentally challenging task. 
A direct, non-invasive system for the measurement of brain-cognitive 
efficiency might offer significant potential for the qualification of 
mental preparedness for, for example, pilots, air traffic controllers, 
athletes, soldiers going into combat, executives going into major 
negotiations, etc. Or, the affects of drugs, alcohol, etc. might best be 
qualified via brain-cognitive efficiency testing. 
At the heart of the present invention is a unique means for the evaluation 
of brain-cognitive efficiency, in terms of response consistency and 
accuracy. This is accomplished by rendering a measurement of appropriate 
errors and individual intra-test variabilites rendering a standard 
deviation of appropriate scores. By combining the standard deviation, 
speed and accuracy of responses the program renders a highly revealing and 
meaningful efficiency score. 
ECTs are "tests" that quantify ECPs by specifically targeting working 
memory only (vs. meta-cognitive mechanisms, eg, learned skills, 
strategies, etc.). The most representative ECTs are chronometric tests 
which quantify information-processing speed, capacity (memory in number of 
information bits), and efficiency (consistency and accuracy). The most 
comprehensive measure of g is via a battery of ECTs which measure as many 
individual ECPs as possible, minimally: perception thresholds; 
brain-speed; WM capacity; WM processing speed (eg, data "rehearsal", 
"encoding" and "manipulation"); WM speed of accessing both short-term 
memory and several "areas" of long term memory (episodic, semantic and 
symbolic), and; WM efficiency. 
It is not known whether the sum of the scores of many individual ECPs (eg, 
the above) has a higher correlation with g, than a single task which 
engages a longer string of cognitive processes. However, the combination 
of the two, that is, summing the individual ECP scores with the "long ECP 
chain" score undoubtedly creates the highest g-correlation, especially 
when the tasks also; 2) "load", or challenge, WM to the threshold of 
breakdown (overload). This is accomplished by (interactively) adjusting 
the test complexity until the pre-breakdown thresholds are reached. At 
this point WM capacity has been fully loaded, or challenged. The ability 
to interactively load (increase) test complexity on-line while a subject 
plays the game, for example, is very important in order to most accurately 
accurately determine peak threshold (ECP) capacity, as well as to optimize 
development of such capacity. 
The invention represents an automatic-and-interactive program, for 
computers or adapted electronic device, that tests, analyzes, and 
potentially improves, how the subject perceives, thinks and reacts, 
physically and mentally. The program is designed to convert any computer 
into an interactive test and training system. 
With frequent use, or training, the program expands the subject's awareness 
of how he or she perceives, thinks and reacts, potentially training the 
user, via brain biofeedback, to improve his or her powers of awareness, 
focus, mental quickness, clarity and efficiency, memory retrieval speed, 
capacity and choice-decision speed. 
The program also plots performance scores over daily, weekly and quarterly 
periods. It allows the subject to register comments, such as any unusual 
conditions surrounding any test. In this way, one learns about the (mental 
and physical) performance effects of drugs, emotions, drinks, foods, 
vitamins, sleep, exercise programs, and etc. The program also challenges 
the subject to improve upon his "baseline" score using on-line feedback 
display of comparative results with positive, and where appropriate 
negative, reinforcement of responses, along with interactive adjustment of 
test complexity (difficulty) to most fully challenge the brain and mind 
and optimize cognitive-enhancement potential. 
In addition, the program provides comments after the entire test battery is 
completed yielding test interpretations, as well as insights into, and 
appropriate suggestions. 
The program's biofeedback capacity trains the above brain-cognitive 
capacities by "shaping responses" towards improvement in perceptual, 
data-processing and decision making abilities, as desired. The program 
also detects the level of noise in the brain's cognitive processing 
pathways (neural noise) which is highly correlated with mental ability and 
stress, and is believed to reflect emotional levels of anxiety and 
frustration. 
By uniquely weighing and valuing a host of test parameters, the following 
examples of individual and complex adjusted scores are rendered: 
physical (sensory-motor) reaction time 
perceptual thresholds 
brain speed and efficiency 
information processing speed and efficiency 
neural noise 
attention level 
choice reaction speed and efficiency 
decision (discrimination) reaction speed and efficiency 
long term memory access speed 
short term "working" memory capacity 
information exchange rate between the brain hemispheres 
a physical performance potential rating 
a mental performance potential rating 
In short, the program measures, evaluates and trains perceptual, 
information processing and mental reaction-speed capacities believed to 
underly the elementary cognitive faculties of awareness, physical reflexes 
and intelligence. 
Yet another, and perhaps less obvious, application of the technology is to 
add true interactivity to multi-media CD ROM entertainment, edutainment 
and education software. The field of interactive software is experiencing 
a dynamic growth phase with the advent of new multi-media mediums, such 
as, CD ROMs, etc. 
Interactive is a term commonly used describing the ability of the user to 
edit or otherwise influence the content and it's delivery via the 
software-hardware system, such as, a floppy disc or CD ROM and a computer. 
However, such interactive systems have no way of knowing how such new 
content affected the user. 
The technology enables a relatively new and improved form of interactivity, 
wherein the content is actually shaped by the user's mental and 
physiologic states (as evidenced by their reactions), which new content, 
in turn influences the user (and their cognitive state), etc. 
For instance, an interactive loop would be formed by using an EEG to 
monitor viewer brain wave patterns evidencing the degree of attention 
payed to (or interest in) a CD ROM story (media content) displayed on a 
screen. If the content, or "presentation stimuli", were qualitatively 
adjusted by the user's brain waves so as to shape a desirable brain wave 
state (reflecting one's paying more attention), such interactive shaping 
of content presentation by user psycho-physiologic, or cognitive, states 
could be called interactive. 
Within the entertainment and edutainment fields there is a growing demand 
for "interactive" software and CD ROM applications which teach while they 
entertain, or otherwise, engage. For instance, computer software 
developers have added "interactive" tutorial texts to their programs for 
the purpose of accelerating the learning process as well as making it more 
user friendly. However, although most if not all of such programs address 
cognitive content-enhancement, that is, the learning of new information 
and skills, such as, how to use Windows, or fix your Volkswagon, few if 
any address cognitive capacity-enhancement, that is, training improvements 
in such cognitive capacities as, memory, attention span, decision speed, 
etc. 
Cognitive capacity-enhancement training requires on-line and immediate 
measurement, analysis and feedback of user's cognitive states (eg, 
attention, memory capacity, mental reaction speed, etc.) which 
interactively adjust content, or "stimulus presentation". For instance, if 
such a training program were to test and train one's perceptual threshold 
(or, "seeing speed"), the program would need to be able to interactively 
adjust the "presentation time" of the "stimulus" until it determined the 
user's perceptual threshold, based on their responses. 
It's obvious how this interactive loop between the hardware/software system 
and the user (ie, their responses which reflect some underlying cognitive 
state, or capacity, such as mental reaction speed) is necessary for the 
accurate evaluation of certain cognitive ability. However, it's equally 
important that on-line and immediate feedback be provided to the user for 
optimal learning of trained improvements in any cognitive capacity. 
Inspite of the demonstrated market interest in self-improvement products, 
such as, books, self-help seminars, etc., there has been a relative dearth 
of software products addressing cognitive- capacity enhancement. One 
primary reason for this has been the lack of user-friendly (eg, 
non-invasive vs. electrodes attached to the brain) true "interactivity". 
It would seem to be of significant advantage, therefore, to the mass 
marketability of such cognitive capacity testing and training programs and 
systems to have user-friendly true (bio) interactivity between the user's 
cognitive states (such as, the measured responses indicating perceptual 
thresholds), and appropriately adjusted content presentation (and feedback 
display). 
The present invention teaches a new, non-invasive and computerized 
methodology for the testing and training of cognitive capacities, and, 
perhaps most uniquely, is so designed to enable a number of new and useful 
broad market applications of interactive educational and entertainment 
software, from standard floopy disc software programs to multi-media CD 
ROM. 
For instance, the present invention allows for the unique value-added 
improvement of standard interactive CD ROM technology and systems, 
converting them into an interactive testing and training, as well as 
entertaining, system products. This could open up whole new markets beyond 
edutainment, such as, braintainment, for example. 
As an example, imagine an exciting kid's game which challenged most if not 
all of their cognitive capacities and brain processing pathways. For 
instance, the game could present shape-shifting Friend and Foe characters, 
unexpectedly and at near subliminal threshold speeds. Speed of advancement 
in the game depends on the player's (very) quick recognition of, and 
appropriate responses to, his Friends and Foes. Not seeing a Foe, or 
misidentifying a Friend, or seeing a pack of Foes too slow (late), would 
all set you back in the game. Conversely, the quicker you could see (your 
perceptual threshold), and identify and appropriately respond to (making a 
correct choice and decision) Friends and Foes, the faster or farther you'd 
advance and perform. With interactive response, the characters would learn 
how the subject is seeing, thinking and reacting. The "monsters" on the 
screen would start to outsmart the user. 
While playing this game the player's cognitive capacities of perception, 
physical and mental reaction and discrimination capacities (speed, 
capacity, efficiency), short term memory recall, long term memory-recall 
speed, and most importantly, attention levels, are all being quantified, 
analyzed and, optionally, displayed for review. 
While the child is having fun, and tuning up his brain, his parents or 
educators are analyzing his mental performance capacities. They will also 
discover how dull or sharp he is today. This will not only reflect how 
well he might learn or test today at school, but over time correlations 
will be revealed between their child's (junk food vs. healthy) eating 
habits, exercise program, nutritional supplements, emotional stress, etc., 
and his mental and physical performance. 
Another envisioned application of such An interactive floppy or ROM disc 
program might be for seniors. It is known, for example, that cognitive 
abilities normally start to decline after years 65 (statistically). That 
is, unless the brain can be exercised in the appropriate manner. 
Interactive brain-games could be employed to slow down, stop, if not 
reverse, at least for a temporary time period, this cognitive 
degeneration. 
REACTION TIME TEST 
FIG. 1 is a flow diagram of a routine which administers a reaction time 
test in accordance with the teachings of the present invention. During 
this test, the system (computer) displays a figure such as that shown in 
FIG. 2 and measures the time required for a subject to depress a key. A 
random delay is introduced at step 16 before the figure is shown, so that 
the subject cannot predict from past experience precisely when the test 
figure will appear (a similar random delay is used in the other tests). 
The reaction time for each trial is recorded. The statistical analysis 
performed on the reaction time data for this and the other tests is 
described below, under DATA ANALYSIS. FIG. 2 is a test figure such as that 
utilized by the system of the present invention for testing reaction time. 
SUBLIMINAL AWARENESS THRESHOLD TEST 
FIGS. 3(a) and 3(b) depict a flow diagram of a routine which administers a 
subliminal awareness threshold test in accordance with the teachings of 
the present invention. This test measures the limits or threshold of one's 
ability to perceive a very brief stimulus. The subject is presented with 
one or two possible stimuli: a very brief outline of a 4-pointed star 
immediately turning into a solid star, or a solid star only. 
FIGS. 4(a) and 4(b) depict a figure useful in the administration of the 
subliminal awareness threshold test in accordance with the present 
teachings. The objective is to discriminate between the two stimuli and 
respond as quickly as possible by depressing the space bar (or other 
designated key) when and only when the star outline is perceived preceding 
the solid star. If the star outline presentation is too brief to be 
detected by the subject, step 146 in FIG. 3(b) slows down (increases) the 
stimulus presentation time. On the other hand, when a predetermined number 
of consecutive elections (e.g., 3) are made without error, step 120 
shortens the stimulus display time. 
Note that at step 112, the initial inspection time is set based on the 
subject's past performance. 
At step 128 is FIG. 3(b), a DRS function is implemented. The DRS 
deterministic random selection) function is a function by which the 
outcome of the total number of trials will always match a particular 
probability distribution profile, although any individual outcome is 
unpredictable. The function accomplishes this by taking past history into 
account when making a random yes/no decision. The function may be 
expressed in informal pseudo-code as follows: 
TABLE I 
______________________________________ 
function DRS (yes.sub.-- chance, total, yes.sub.-- already, no already) 
// yes.sub.-- chance probability of YES response (between 0 and 1) 
// total total number of responses in set 
// yes.sub.-- already YES responses previously returned 
// no.sub.-- already NO responses previously returned 
n = (total * yes chance - yes already)/(total - yes.sub.-- already - 
no.sub.-- already) 
rnd = random 0 // random number less than 1 but greater 
than or equal to zero 
if n &gt; rnd then 
return (YES) 
else 
return (NO) 
end if 
end function 
______________________________________ 
The DRS function is used in many of the tests conducted herein. In step 
128, it s set to select the "Display Outline" path with a probability of 
0.6. 
PERCEPTUAL AWARENESS THRESHOLD TEST 
FIG. 5 depicts a flow diagram of a routine which administers a perceptual 
awareness threshold test in accordance with the teachings of the present 
invention. 
FIG. 6 illustrates an individual figure utilized during the perceptual 
awareness threshold test. 
FIG. 7 illustrates a second display figure utilized during the perceptual 
awareness threshold test. During this test, the system first adjusts the 
presentation time based on the object's past performance (step 212). At 
steps 218-222 in FIG. 5, during the perceptual awareness threshold test, 
an individual figure, such as that shown in FIG. 6, is presented on a 
black background in the same position as one of the circles on the left or 
right side of the displayed figure. After a presentation delay which is 
determined in part by the subject's past performance (e.g., 20 to 50 
milliseconds), the rest of the figure FIG. 7) is displayed. To the 
subject, the screen appears to contain 8 lights, one of which turns on a 
little before the rest. 
The subject presses one of two keys to indicate on which side, left or 
right, the initial single figure was displayed (e.g., the right-arrow key 
if the single figure speared on the right, or the left-arrow key if the 
figure appeared on the left). If the subject selected the correct side, 
the presentation delay is reduced (step 244); if the subject selected the 
wrong side or failed to respond within 3 seconds of the presentation of 
the stimulus, the presentation delay is increased (step 238). Trial errors 
and response times are recorded for tabulation at the end of the test. 
MULTIPLE-CHOICE REACTION TIME TEST 
FIG. 8 depicts a flow diagram of a routine which administers a 
multiple-choice reaction time test in accordance with the teachings of the 
present invention. The display of FIG. 9 is used. 
FIG. 9 is a display figure utilized during the multiple-choice reaction 
time test. During this test, the segments labeled N, S, E, and W normally 
form dark red square ring. The stimulus consists of one of these segments 
changing to a light yellow color. At the same time, the moat 38 may or may 
not change color from ark blue to light cyan. The subject responds by 
depressing the appropriate key. If the moat is illuminated (i.e., has 
changed color), the subject must also press the shift key the responses 
are tabulated for subsequent display. 
WORKING MEMORY CAITY TEST 
FIG. 10 depicts a flow diagram of a routine which administers a working 
memory capacity test in accordance with the teachings of the present 
invention. In this test 400, after a random delay, the system performs a 
DRS function to select a "letters" or "symbols" test with equal 
probability. The two forms of the test are identical, except that one 
displays a set of capital letters A-Z, and the other a set of geometrical 
symbols (circle, triangle, and square) with any of three concentric 
segments filled-in or empty, as illustrated in FIG. 11(a) and (b). FIG. 
11(a) and (b) depict display figures utilized by the short term memory 
test. 
In step 428, an initial set of characters is displayed (the 
"presentations"). The number of letters or symbols presented is determined 
by past performance, and ranges between 3 and 13. The letters or symbols 
are presented in random order, and are all different from one another. 
After a short delay (step 430), the presentation is erased and a "probe" of 
a smaller number of characters is displayed. The probe consists of a 
random set of letters or symbols, and may or may not (with 50% likelihood) 
contain one or more letters or symbols that also appeared in the 
presentation. The count of probe characters ranges from 1 to 11. 
If the probe contains a letter or symbol that appeared in the presentation, 
the subject is to press a YES key (e.g., the right-arrow key); if none of 
the probe characters were part of the presentation, the subject is to 
press a NO key (e.g., the left arrow key). 
If the subject responded incorrectly, the number of letters or symbols is 
reduced or the next letters or symbols trial. If the subject responds 
correctly to two consecutive trials without an intervening error and with 
a reaction time of less than 1200 milliseconds, the number of letters or 
symbols is increased for the next trial (step 450). 
A score representing the aggregate difficulty of the test is obtained by 
summing the total characters (letters and symbols) correctly identified 
during the test run of 8 letter trials and 8 symbol trials. 
WORD PICTURE ASSOCIATION TEST 
FIG. 12 depicts a flow diagram of a routine which administers a word 
picture association test in accordance with the teachings of the present 
invention. During this test, a word is presented along with a picture. If 
they are the same, the subject is instructed to respond with a YES 
indication. If not, the subject responds with a NO. However, if a tone 
sounds during the trial, the subject is to reverse his answer only for 
that trial. 
DATA ANALYSIS 
The reaction time (RT) and other test-specific data (e.g., inspection time, 
presentation time, character count) are analyzed statistically for each 
test to produce the following results (in all cases the fastest, slowest, 
and any erroneous trials are excluded from the RT computation): 
Physical reaction time (milliseconds): computed as the median RT in the 
Reaction Time Test. 
Subliminal awareness threshold (milliseconds): computed as the briefest 
interval successfully observed by the subject during a "set" of 5 trials 
in the Subliminal awareness Threshold Test (FIG. 3(a)). 
Perceptual awareness threshold (milliseconds): computed as the briefest 
presentation delay successfully observed by the subject in 3 successive 
trials in the Perceptual awareness Threshold Test (FIG. 5). 
Information processing/Decision making speed (milliseconds): computed as 
the median .about.T in the Multiple Choice Reaction Time Test (FIG. 8). 
Efficiency: for a given test, a percentage computed according to the 
formula 
EQU Efficiency=100N(RT-S)/RT(N+ERR) 
where N is the number of trials after the fastest and slowest trials are 
discarded, and does not include erroneous trials; RT is the median 
reaction time in milliseconds for correctly completed trials; S is the 
standard deviation (sigma) of the RTs, a measurement of "noise" in the 
cognitive system (the standard deviation is computed by averaging the 
squares of the difference of the RT of each trial and the mean RT, then 
taking the square root of the average); ERR is the number of incorrect 
trials. A test completed with all RTs exactly the same would yield an 
efficiency of 100%. Efficiency measures the consistency, rather than the 
speed, of the subject's reactions. Typical efficiencies range from 75% to 
90%; more complex tests tend to produce lower efficiency figures for a 
given subject. Research has indicated that intra-individual variability in 
RT, which the Efficiency level reflects, is highly correlated with g 
Jensen 1982!. 
Working memory capacity: computed as the total number of characters 
displayed in the presentation and probe sets of the Working memory 
Capacity Test (FIG. 10) in those trials that are successfully completed by 
the subject. This can range from 64 (3 presentation and 1 probe characters 
in 16 trials) to 384 (13 presentation and 11 probe characters in 16 
trials). 
Performance level (PL): a conveniently-scaled "score" used to give the 
subject a relative idea of his performance. The performance level is 
computed in two stages, first a get an "adjusted RT" reflecting efficiency 
EQU RTadj=100RT/Efficiency 
then the actual performance level is scaled from RTadj such that PL=50 for 
a subject in the 20th percentile of performance, and PL=100 for a subject 
in the 90th percentile of performance. The scale factor used varies with 
the particular test, as more complex tests result in larger RTs. 
DATA RECORDING AND DISPLAY 
Detailed information about each trial, consisting of RT and perceptual 
threshold or difficulty level as appropriate, is available for display 
upon completion of the test. The subject can see, for example, the effect 
of the appearance of letters or symbols in the Working memory Capacity 
test, or the difference in response times for individual trials in the 
Word-Picture Test when the reversing tone is present. This per-trial 
information is then discarded, and only summary results are saved. 
The subject may enter a comment at the completion of any test to describe 
any factors that he thinks may have influenced his score. This comment 
will appear on the history graph described below whenever the period of 
time including the comment is displayed. 
The summary test results described above are time and date-stamped and 
saved for subsequent review. The system provides a History graph, on which 
may be selected for display any of the above results for any period of 
time. This History information, coupled with the comment entry described 
above, allows the subject to track his performance over time and identify 
what factors influence his performance. In addition, he user may view 
results from multiple tests plotted with their results averaged together, 
to see the effect of a combination of tests. Specific starting and ending 
dates may be selected. 
The History graph may be operated in either of two modes. In TEMPORAL node, 
performance history is displayed over time, with date/time labels on the 
X-axis. Each type of data is plotted as a line graph. In PERIODIC mode, 
the data can be examined for cyclic behavior. In addition to starting and 
ending dates, the user selects he number of days in the period. All the 
data between starting and ending dates is scatter-plotted (each data value 
is plotted as a point on the graph) in segments of the specified number of 
days. For example, the performance of the subject for various times of the 
day could be displayed by setting the period to 1 day. All the 8:00 a.m. 
results for the entire history period will be plotted next to each other, 
all the 9:00 a.m. results likewise, and so on. Similarly, a weekly cycle 
could be displayed by setting the period to 7 days. If the starting date 
is set to a Sunday, then Day 0 on the graph will hold all the Sunday 
scores, day 1 will hold all the Monday scores, etc. 
Thus, the present invention has been described herein with reference to a 
particular embodiment for a particular application. Those having ordinary 
skill in the art and access to the present teachings will recognize 
additional modifications applications and embodiments within the scope 
thereof. For example, the invention is not limited to the particular tests 
disclosed. Other tests may be incorporated as will be appreciated by those 
skilled in the art. 
It is therefore intended by the appended claims to cover any and all such 
applications, modifications and embodiments within the scope of the 
present invention.