Attached is a link to two tests that evaluate how we jump to conclusions. Take the test, read the evaluation of your performance, and post your two scores (if you're not too embarrassed to be honest about it!).

Uncritical Inference Test

I can't find any immediate information on the construction and validation of this instrument, but I've taken versions of similar tests when i was a teenager and did very poorly. I knew what to look for this time and did much better (9 out of 12 for the first test; 19 out of 20 for the second).

All that means is that if you don't do as well as you hoped, don't beat yourself up about it or attack the fairness of the test. Just think about what it's trying to teach you, and try to identify how you can make your thinking a bit sharper.

I sincerely hope every last one of you gets perfect scores and blows me out of the water. Crow all you want!

Remember, just the facts, ma'am.

P.S. Moderators, please move this thread if this is not the best place for it.

I got 9 and 20

Being a Sherlock Holmes and Hannibal Lecter fan Does WONDERS for your observational skills!

-Sarge

Not to bad ...first time...1 test 10 of 12 right Second test 19 of 20 right ....funny looking at the ones you get wrong and the explination....pretty neat

9 out of 12
16 out of 20

11 out of 12
18 out of 20

I scored an 11 out of 12. I answered one question incorrectly. Number 9. I answered the other questions correctly.

[edit] On the second test, I scored a 19 out of 20. I answered one question incorrectly. Number 9, again!

10 of 12 for the first.
18 of 20 for the second.

Makes my pea brain hurt to have to think that much. Fun though.

Thanks Jud.

Everyone who has replied so far has probably done better than would a random cross section of the population. But consider this--you put your mind "on its best behavior" because you knew you were being tested.

The tests do illustrate part of the reason why many eyewitness accounts probably are suspect. There are three steps to an observation. Our optic nerves (in the case of a visual observation) generate data, our brain unconsciously unscrambles it, and then we consciously interpret and rationalize the data, particularly if the first two steps leave ambiguity. And initial ambiguity will often exist, since the observation will often be of brief duration, in poor light, and at a substantial distance.

How often does someone say "It couldn't have been anything else, because [fill in the blank]"? Because I know bears, I know tree stumps, you name it. And once an eyewitness has reached an initial conclusion, it is human nature to defend the analysis and become invested in it.

I continue to believe that there are more good faith erroneous reports than there are fraudulent ones.

-Vern

I believe that this test is a good way to check your memory's filing system.
Once you read the story, you have everything you need to know. After that it is just a matter of how well you can retrieve that information from where it is filed.
Excellent post!

10 correct out of 12 on first
20 correct out of 20 on second

However, the wording in the tests made it somewhat biased against those of us living in the United States, and the results should not be used by any entity to make a decision that will in effect alter any Ameirican's current status quo. It is a fact, that wording and choice of phrasing can alter the maximum score achievable dependant upon location of where the test was created vs. where it was administered. This reality was proven by the US Educational System when it found that tests were in fact biased against children of the inner cities, compared to those in other areas of the country. Those who have been exposed to the edited "Inner City Tests" covering the same subject matter, can understand how large of an impact wording and phrasing can play.

In the first test the choice of the words PETROL, RODS and SPLUTTERED should be considered biased. The American version should use GASOLINE, POLES and SPUTTERED. In the second story the worst infraction of all is found. The reference to a Doctor making a HOUSE CALL is enough to create a shock wave even in the most stout of heart. This shocking display of using a fantasy based episode in such a scientifically significant research project should not go unchallenged.

Therefore, on behalf of all Americans, as well as those who were subjected to the American Educational Systems during their formative years, I challenge the accuracy of these results.

We request that either
A. The tests are rewritten to allow an unbiased challenge
B. We are given an extra 10 freebie points to justify the grading curve


I am joking here so no nasty e-mails please!

Very cool! 9 and 15 respectively. Makes ya think

11 out of 12 on the first.
17 out of 20 on the second.

Test 1 : 9 of 12 and test 2: 18 of 20

Same as Stanpaw. 10/12, 18/20.

I found six typos on their site and (as invited in a notice at the end) e-mailed corrections to the webmaster. I like to do that to instructors.

11 out of 12, and 19 out of 20

Hmmphf! I fully expected to do great on these, but I only got 9/12 and 18/20! That's not bad, but it sure makes you feel dumb when you read the explanations and go "Oh, duuuuhhhhhh...."

True dat!

Test 1: 11 out of 12 right

Test 2: All 20 right