Skip to main content

How good is your memory?

January 13, 2009 by coglanglab

coglanglab's picture

The average 20-29 year old scores a 2.5 on my Memory Test. How well can you do?

There are, of course, different types of memory. Most people think of 'memory' as an ability to recall facts and events from days or even years ago. This is what was destroyed in the famous amnesic H. M. However, H. M. was still able to remember new information for at least a few seconds; that is, his short-term ("working") memory was spared. There are also other types of memory, such as iconic memory, also knows as "sensory" memory. Moreover, memory for facts seems to dissociate from memory for skills ("know-how").

The Memory Test tests visual working memory.

Before you take the test, please do me one favor. If you want to test yourself multiple times, feel free to do so. But please check off the "have you done this experiment before" box. Failing to do this can screw up the data, so it's important.

What Does the Test Involve?

You try to remember four simple shapes for one second. Afterwards, you are shown a single shape. You have to decide if it is one of the four you were to remember. There are 40 trials, plus some practice trials.

A note about the practice: The practice trials are really, really hard. That is to get you warmed up, just like a runner tying weights to her ankles during her warm-up. The actual test is easier.

How is the Score Calculated?

On any given trial, you get the answer either right or wrong. We could just calculate what percentage you get right, but that would mean getting a score like "80%," which isn't very satisfying. 80% of what?

A formula developed by Nelson Cowan can be used to estimate how many of the shapes, on average, actually make it into your short-term memory store. The formula is this:

(% hits + % correct rejections - 1) / (Total number of objects)

A 'hit' means answering 'yes, this is one of the four objects,' when in fact that is the correct answer. A 'correct rejection' is saying 'no, this is not one of the four object,' when in fact it is not.

From the math, the score can run from -1/4, if you get every question wrong, to 4, if you get every question right (which has happened, but rarely). If you guessed at random, you should get half the questions right, in which case your score should be 0.

Keep in mind that this depends completely on the shapes. If the shapes are really hard to remember (as the practice shapes are), scores will be lower. If they are very easy, scores will be higher. What makes a shape easy is not just how complex it is, but how similar it is to the other shapes (how easy the shapes are to confuse with one another).

What Does the Score Mean?

You could have a higher or lower score for a number of reasons. For one thing, you might have guessed abnormally well or abnormally poorly. All tests are subject to a guessing effect. On average, guessing cancels itself out, but if the test is short enough and enough people take is, somebody is likely to get everything right (or wrong) just by chance.

Luck aside, a good score could mean that you have more "room" in your short-term memory. It might also mean you are better at avoiding interference. There are several types of interference in memory, and so you could be better at avoiding any one of them. You might also be better at paying attention, or you might have developed a useful strategy for success on this task. (That said, visual short-term memory does appear to be anywhere near as susceptible to strategies as verbal short-term memory.)

Remember one thing. This is not a clinical test. Though clinical tests for verbal short-term memory exist, I'm not sure there even are clinical tests for visual short-term memory. This is just for fun. Enjoy it.

Wait. How Do you Know What the Average Score Is?

The Memory Test is nearly identical to an experiment I ran previously. I used the data from that version to estimate what the scores will be on this version.

(Photo served from the National Geographic website)

Comments

Now only 1st time I finished and scored 3.3

September 25, 2009 by Anonymous, 11 weeks 5 days ago
Comment: 45000

Good Test But It is measuring only short term memory. It is Ok It was interesting.

Heh,

January 21, 2009 by Anonymous, 47 weeks 3 hours ago
Comment: 33896

3.2 on the first one...

The problem was that I rushed - a couple of them I shouldn't have scored incorrectly on (I was just click happy), and when I did, it happened back-to-back. I only had to pause a second and think about it again and I could remember them easily.

Eric

interesting test, 2.4 for the first try and 3.1 on the second

January 14, 2009 by Anonymous, 48 weeks 2 hours ago
Comment: 33764

That was interesting.

I'm 50 and male. I scored 2.4 the first time and 3.1 the second try.

Because the practice test was so hard I didn't realize until about half-way through the real test that if I relaxed I could hold a visual picture of all four images until the single one appeared -- and then it was easier to match.

The second time I relaxed and used an indirect gaze to capture the scene as a whole and as long as I stayed focussed and relaxed the image was still there when the matcher appeared.

I use an indirect gaze when launching my hang glider from a cliff -- I have to look at everything and at nothing in specific at the same time. I'm working at creating a visualization of something I can't see -- what the flow patterns in the air in front of me are -- and will be in the next 5s. There are many kinds of data that go into that kind of visualization but where there is vegetation that moves in the breeze seeing the patterns of change in the movements of ALL the vegetation is very helpful.

I was very curious to see the aggregate results but they don't appear to be available yet.

If you do this test twice...

January 15, 2009 by coglanglab, 47 weeks 6 days ago
Comment: 33779

I hope you made sure to mark on the first page of the test that you had already participated. If you don't do that, you could make the results unusable (and waste the time of everybody else who participated).

Yes, I have other safeguards in place to remove participants who lie (whether on purpose or on accidence), but it makes everything easier if people just follow these few simple instructions.

Thanks!

Please try my web-based experiments

yes, I marked the subsequent test properly

January 16, 2009 by Anonymous, 47 weeks 5 days ago
Comment: 33795

I followed the instructions for marking the subsequent trial runs correctly.

You could also associate browser cookies with completed tests to help lessen this issue.

Glad I could help, plus a little feedback...

January 14, 2009 by Anonymous, 48 weeks 17 hours ago
Comment: 33744

*SPOILER ALERT - IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE TEST YOU MAY WANT TO SKIP THIS AS IT HAS INFORMATION ABOUT THE SHAPES*

A couple of things I noticed while taking the test:

First, the black shapes leave a white(ish) afterimage against the grey background (at least in my vision), and this occasionally helped me to guess correctly. The afterimage didn't last quite long enough to see all of the shapes clearly when the new shape appeared, but they did allow me to determine when the new shape was different in size than the old one.

Second, the "bomb" shape was far and away the easiest one for me to remember because my brain so clearly identified it as a bomb. Too many 8-bit video games, I guess.

Re: Spoiler

January 14, 2009 by coglanglab, 48 weeks 16 hours ago
Comment: 33746

***SPOILER ALERT. DON'T READ BEFORE DOING EXPERIMENT***

The afterimage is something I'm interested in, too. It seems to interact in interesting ways with eye-movements, but I've never figured out how. I think it might be related to 'iconic' or 'sensory' memory. Unfortunately, that's not my specialty.

As you say, the 1-second delay is supposed to be long enough to void any effects of the afterimage.

----
Please try my web-based experiments

Very Interesting...

January 13, 2009 by Anonymous, 48 weeks 1 day ago
Comment: 33734

I scored 2.5 exactly... I'm 28, so I guess I'm average :).

Thanks for sharing this.
Lew



About us

Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.


Premium Drupal Themes by Adaptivethemes