Personal IQ improvement
Windt
gains within the task-ie higher nback score. Personally I don't feel
much smarter but I've noticed I read faster and can comprehend what I
am reading at a faster speed as well. Previously I scored a 109, then
after 40 sessions I scored at 122 on the Denmark Mensa IQ test.
http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf. My concern is that this supposed gain
has not made a noticable improvement in my real-world intelligence,
and that the denmark IQ test is unreliable. I had taken the IQ test
repeatedly before training and never thought I'd score above a 112.
But I did. After training....:)
Windt
matrices score, I am not entirely convinced this has any bearing on
other cognitively demanding tests-like the SAT, verbal IQ tests,
MCATs, LSATs or in everyday life. I recently took a Mensa puzzle brain-
teaser and scored a 18/30, which seems fairly mediocre? I don't
know..I was pretty stumped by some of the questions. Didn't make me
feel too smart.
On Nov 24, 10:59 pm, Windt <keif...@aol.com> wrote:
> I've done about 40 half-hour sessions of dual n back and have made
> gains within the task-ie higher nback score. Personally I don't feel
> much smarter but I've noticed I read faster and can comprehend what I
> am reading at a faster speed as well. Previously I scored a 109, then
> after 40 sessions I scored at 122 on the Denmark Mensa IQ test.http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf. My concern is that this supposed gain
whoisbambam
i have no idea about improving iq scores
but my mind absolutely feels faster and better than it was prior to
dnb
if i were u, i would increase the speed of nback. in other words, drop
the ticks down from 30 to 28, then 26, then 25, until u get to 20
i never thought i could get to 20, but i did, and my mind feels faster
in everyday life
i can not necessarily say it is dnb, but i am pretty sure it is
yes, i also take mg threonate and fish oil now for many months--
possibly synergistic
do i feel i have a huge iq boost? no. i doubt that. i am probably
still somewhere around 100 were i have always guesstimated my iq to be
but my mind feels sharper, faster, healthier. i really have no idea
how it happened.
i am much less mentally fatigued when i study--and i have been doing
lots of learning
i recently started taken bacognize and i am hopeful it gives me a tiny
bit more of an edge
IMO, everything one can do to improve memory probably only makes a 10%
difference when combined
but for me, the fact that i dont get nearly as tired provides me the
perseverance/stamina i had in my 20s (nearly).
i will be adding beta alanine for the last push in stamina as lifting
weights and working now over 22 straight 12hr shifts has become
exhausting (but i have downtime wherein i can learn information etc
for a couple hours a day at work)
the only thing i regret is that i stopped dnb for 45 or so days
my ADD has returned. i want to learn this, and that over there, and
blah blah. I have resumed some dnb training in hopes of assuaging my
ADD--a true curse
as a matter of fact, i can not even do dnb at 3 seconds as my freakin'
mind starts wandering. i do BETTER at 25 ticks and lower than i do at
30, at any level
damn
i guess i am going to have to do weekly maintenance for the rest of my
life
dnb has seemed to cure my wandering mind--i also have to play videos
at faster speed (thank god for vlc player) for the same reason
On Nov 24, 9:59 pm, Windt <keif...@aol.com> wrote:
> I've done about 40 half-hour sessions of dual n back and have made
> gains within the task-ie higher nback score. Personally I don't feel
> much smarter but I've noticed I read faster and can comprehend what I
> am reading at a faster speed as well. Previously I scored a 109, then
> after 40 sessions I scored at 122 on the Denmark Mensa IQ test.http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf. My concern is that this supposed gain
Colin Dickerman
On Nov 24, 7:59 pm, Windt <keif...@aol.com> wrote:
> I've done about 40 half-hour sessions of dual n back and have made
> gains within the task-ie higher nback score. Personally I don't feel
> much smarter but I've noticed I read faster and can comprehend what I
> am reading at a faster speed as well. Previously I scored a 109, then
> after 40 sessions I scored at 122 on the Denmark Mensa IQ test.http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf. My concern is that this supposed gain
odranoel
two different kinds of intelligence measures: fluid and crystallized.
DNB is supposed to increase Gf, but a test like the SAT heavily
weights Gc. As an example, a heavily vocabulary based test is poorly
designed to detect changes in Gf, because changes in Gf do not
automatically result in increased vocabulary. That is, increasing
fluid intelligence does not cause you to suddenly know more words. You
would probably expect some modest improvement on some tasks where you
know the information, but had bottlenecks on retrieval time.
However, one's crystallized intelligence would eventually improve as
the fluid intelligence is turned to practical matters and more
knowledge is acquired
γενβιρΟ
That's cool that you've made some progress.
May I suggest trying out arithmetic n-back. I've personally found this
mode to be more beneficial in regards to helping with "verbal
reasoning", especially if the problem requires a high degree of recall
(reasonable dichotomy with regular n-back, in that for the most part,
it requires recognition processes as opposed to those that are recall
based, which seems to be largely the case for arithmetic-n-back). The
end-game with arithmetic-n-back would be to try and be able to
comfortably play variable-arithmetic-n-back. It took me a couple of
months (I think - on and off) to reach a decent n-level with this
variant.
A simple example:
Four suspects - Tommy, Bonny, Ronny and Lonny - are being interviewed
at the scene of a murder. Each of the suspects is asked a question.
Their answers are as follows:
Tommy: "Bonny committed the murder"
Bonny: "Lonny committed the murder"
Ronny: "I didn't commit the murder"
Lonny: "Bonny is lying"
Only one of the four answers is the truth. Who committed the murder?
For those that want to figure it out, I'll leave out the answer for
later.
Take it easy.
Pontus Granström
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To post to this group, send email to brain-t...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/brain-training?hl=en.
shitsumeisha
Ronny did it.
Only one person is telling the truth.
If Lonny is telling the truth, Ronny is lying. So he is the murder.
If Lonny is lying, Bonny tells the truth. So Ronny is lying and he is
the murder.
γενβιρΟ
He shoots, he runs, he fires, he jumps and he drops.... He scores, he
wins, he hits, he lands and he CATCHES!!!
Well done, Ronny did do it!
But I suppose his criminal mind is not as corrupt or disorganized as
the judicial system that he NOW FACES!!!
Ha ha.
On Nov 29, 11:51 pm, shitsumeisha <shitsumei...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> As guessing seems to be opened now ... ;-)
> Ronny did it.
> Only one person is telling the truth.
> If Lonny is telling the truth, Ronny is lying. So he is the murder.
> If Lonny is lying, Bonny tells the truth. So Ronny is lying and he is
> the murder.
>
AshDog
is false. So Bonny's statement is true. Since it is true, Lonny is
the murderer. But Ronny's statement is false, which means he is also
the murderer. So we have two murderers, which is a contradiction
since it is stipulated that there is only one murderer.
On Nov 29, 6:51 am, shitsumeisha <shitsumei...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> As guessing seems to be opened now ... ;-)
> Ronny did it.
> Only one person is telling the truth.
> If Lonny is telling the truth, Ronny is lying. So he is the murder.
> If Lonny is lying, Bonny tells the truth. So Ronny is lying and he is
> the murder.
>
shitsumeisha
γενβιρΟ
If you go through each name and compare it to each statement in a
linear fashion, it makes it much easier to figure out.
Here's why Ronny committed the murder:
Tommy: "Bonny committed the murder"
False, if bonny committed the murder that means that Ronny would also
have to be the murderer, but because there is only one truthful
statement and considering you can't have two murders, it's false.
Bonny: "Lonny committed the murder"
False, same thing, if Lonny committed the that means that Ronny would
also have to be the murderer, but because there is only one truthful
statement and considering you can't have two murders, it's false.
Ronny: "I didn't commit the murder"
False, Ronny did.
Let's regroup now. So far we have 3 false answers and none of them
_conflict_ with one another, and thus they so far satisfy the
criterion.
Lonny: "Bonny is lying"
True. Bonny is lying because Lonny didn't commit the murder, Ronny
did.
MURDERER = Ronny.
Notice that there is no contradiction with the rules of the question
or the statements of the suspects, thus this conclusion must be true,
based on the information made available.
Final question, will Ronny make it to the jail cell or will he hijack
the cops keys, snatch his weapon and go GTA on the police vehicle?
This, some may consider, is indeterminable, given that we don't know
enough about Ronny or the circumstances that surrounded his choice to
murder someone.
:-)
Mike
- if Bonny is right, then you get 2 murderers (Ronny and Lonny). --> impossible.
- if Lonny is right, then you get only one murderer: Ronnie --> by elimination that is the only possible answer.
Mike
- if Bonny is right, then you get 2 murderers (Ronny and Lonny). --> impossible.
- if Lonny is right, then you get only one murderer: Ronnie --> by elimination that is the only possible answer.
γενβιρΟ
#1. you say you agree with ashdog (who believes it's indeterminable
because there are 2 possible murders that can be deduced from the
statements provided)
#2. then you go on to explain why Ronny is the only possible murderer.
which one is it?
On Dec 3, 3:52 am, Mike <mikebk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah I agree with AshDog,
>
> because Bonny and Lonny are contradicting themselves, only one of those 2,
> out of the 4, can be right (they can't be both wrong).
> then you test the 2:
>
> - if Bonny is right, then you get 2 murderers (Ronny and Lonny). -->
> impossible.
> - if Lonny is right, then you get only one murderer: *Ronnie *--> by
> elimination that is the only possible answer.
>
> 2011/11/29 γενβιρΟ <carsthatdr...@hotmail.com>
Sascha L.
> has not made a noticable improvement in my real-world intelligence,
> and that the denmark IQ test is unreliable. I had taken the IQ test
> repeatedly before training and never thought I'd score above a 112.
> But I did. After training....:)
intelligence, I recommend to read the print versions of the relatively
intellectual magazines economist.com and guardian.co.uk on an almost
daily basis.
spiegel.de/international might be also an option.
Windt
Online IQ tests can be fairly unreliable in predicting intelligence,
so therein lay my skepticism. If I improve on the denmark IQ test does
this mean I'm actually getting smarter, or am I simply getting better
at taking the test?
Update: I took the same IQ test(Denmark Mensa) again and I scored a
126, 4 points higher than my previous score of 122. Between taking the
tests I had practiced dual n back for about 14 half hour sessions.
Windt
intelligence(especially a whole standard deviation despite an
improvement in IQ) therefore I remain skeptical.
> > spiegel.de/international might be also an option.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The.Fourth.Deviation.
WM training, and likely growing in density. So your IQ is necessarily
higher, though you cant tell how things have changed for you.
For example, DNB, with certainty, improves recall. Since you havent
noticed this, its likely that you aren't very sensitive to changes in
your cognition. Plus, there are several factors in IQ. DNB improves
some of those factors, not 100% of them. If you want to improve more
aspects of IQ, study a musical instrument and do physical exercise
along with DNB. also, be sure to use many different DNB modes to get
maximum benefit.
I do these things and more and I can notice daily improvements and
changes in my thinking (2-3 hours plus of piano practice + dnb has
changed my thought processes enough that Ive made it all a daily
routine).
Mike
γενβιρΟ
I took the idea from a puzzle book, however I recommend making your
own instead of searching endlessly for similar kinds of questions. You
may find that you'll get a better workout, so to speak, as well as
this, you'll also probably be able to develop better strategies when
it comes to answering these types of questions, considering you are
kind of reverse engineering the question.
On Dec 6, 2:01 am, Mike <mikebk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi γενβιρΟ, I think that AshDog just meant that Shitsumeisha's *second* point
> (last line of his first comment) was indeterminate, not the whole question.
> at least that's how I understood it. I think that's also what
> Shitsumeisha had understood when he answered that "he was sloppy" --> he
> said that because his second point was false (If Lonny is lying, Bonny
> tells the truth. So Ronny is lying and he is the murder. ...and Lonny would
> be too), but by chance this didn't affect the overall answer.
>
> where are these questions coming from btw? I would want to practice those
> types of questions, I'm sure you can develop some useful strategies to deal
> with them faster/more systematically over time.
>
> 2011/12/3 γενβιρΟ <dicone...@gmail.com>