#1. "Flight" control, which is one of the psychometric tasks regularly
used to measure visual "coordination" (to the best of my knowledge) is
comparable to something that could be deemed multitasking. What is
relevant here is the type of multitasking that's involved; key words
here are monitoring and divided attention across a number of
variables. What it does _not_ necessarily involve is the independent
task switching between variable,s which is what can generally be seen
in the classical sense of multitasking.
----> What are the substitutes for this game?
1. Multitask 2, which can be found here - http://www.kongregate.com/games/IcyLime/multitask-2
and discussed here -
https://groups.google.com/group/brain-training/browse_thread/thread/77a13c71bd1ea041/d6238898b4eea3f6?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=multitasking+game#d6238898b4eea3f6
- Pro's = It encompasses the dividing of attention and monitoring of a
number of variables quite well
= The game is adaptive (gets harder as you progress)
- Con's = Performance is not saved, whereby you can go back to the
level that you reached the next time you play as opposed to starting
all over again
= Along with this, it hence wastes a lot of time before a
user is able to be pushed to their limits.
2. Space fortress
- Pro's = It encompasses the dividing of attention and monitoring of a
number of variables quite well
= The game is adaptive (gets harder as you progress)
- Con's = (???) Performance is not saved, whereby you can go back to
the level that you reached the next time you play as opposed to
starting all over again
= (???) Along with this, it hence wastes a lot of time
before a user is able to be pushed to their limits.
3. N-back
*** Conditions that could apply if one wishes to encompass the
elements involved in "coordination" as much as possible.
A. Do not exceed n-1-back = To avoid focusing on n-back
B. Increase the variables one wishes to monitor to the point
where they are "comfortably stressed".
C. Once one has increased the variables to the maximum limit
(and is comfortable with the difficulty), then they can start
increasing the speed or otherwise decreasing the time per interval/
trial to provide more of a challenge.
- Pro's = It encompasses the dividing of attention and monitoring of a
number of variables quite well
= The game is adaptive (gets harder as you progress)
- Con's = The only thing I can say here is that I would prefer it if
the idea encompassed what is described in the idea below. However,
aside from that I can't see how there is an extreme difference in
terms of what mental processes would be relied on here.
Discussion about stretching one's limit with Brain Workshop in
relation to the number of variables is play at any given moment is
discussed:
---------------------------------------------------
Proposal (??)
Well, it's not novel, all it involves is just further advances on
what's possible with the first experimental task (verbal monitoring
task) described to measure "coordination".
Description of this task:
The verbal monitoring task consisted of a 3×3 matrix with a word in
each of the nine cells. One randomly chosen word was replaced every
2s. The space bar had to be pressed whenever three rhyming words were
presented in either the horizontal, vertical, or diagonal line.
Points to be made:
#1. This (rhyming pattern) by itself would not be hard to implement
#2. However, I would also make it apply to other variables (images,
colours, sounds, operation, orientation and position) so there are
variations of the task.
#3. Two additional variables I think could be neat to include are
orientation (which direction is the image facing) and a number pattern
task, for example it could either involve discerning whether a few
numbers displayed in the 3x3 matrix add up to a particular number
(operation match) (key number = 14. 2, 9 and 3 (working on the
assumption that it's +, obviously the minus and addition sign could
also be included) are shown, because they add up to 14, this would be
classified as a match or if the key number = 12, and the numbers
displayed were 4, 4, 4 then it would be an operation match as well as
a visual match)) or working out whether those numbers exhibit some
kind of pattern (for example, the numbers presented are 3, 6, 9 = +3
as being the pattern match))
#4. Obviously on n-0-back it is hard for a _sound_ pattern to emerge,
therefore, an adaptation (inspired by combination n-back) could be to
connect _sound_ to either image, colour, operation or orientation
(ideally switching between each), for example, if two triangles and
one circle pop up on the screen while at the same time you hear
"triangle" then this would be a match (under the assumption that all
you need is consistency in 3 variables for there to be a _match_).
#5. Position = A match could just be if the images displayed are
presented in a linear fashion, e.g., a set of images are either placed
diagonally, horizontally or vertically
#6. To aid the idea of making it adaptive, as one gets better they
could essentially just increase the number of relations they need to
perceive, e.g. at any one time they could potentially have to discern
a pattern between a colour, image, orientation, sound, position and
operation.
---> Once someone masters this = larger matrix and more patterns that
need to be simultaneously perceived = wishful thinking :-)
If anyone has any ideas they'd like to add or otherwise just have an
opinion on what's been said so far, by all means...
On Sep 24, 7:17 am, "J." <joseph.a.albrecht...@gmail.com> wrote:
> @ genvirO
>
> I'm eagerly waiting to hear this game that you've thought up...
>
> On Sep 23, 1:54 pm, genvirO <carsthatdr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I've actually thought of a really neat "coordination" game that could
> > be easily implemented into Brain Workshop along with a number of
> > variations/combinations. I'll elaborate on it tomorrow (or later today
> > - it's currently 3:51AM - need to get some sleep!).
>
> > On Sep 24, 3:44 am, genvirO <carsthatdr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > So far I've just found a bunch of speed tasks. However, some of these
> > > speed tasks do involve elementary pattern recognition skills but just
> > > not anything that resembles "coordination". I recently read a paper
> > > explaining that "coordination" predicted speed of multitasking,
> > > however I doubt multitasking training would improve "coordination"
> > > much, if anything at all. The most important aspect here to
> > > acknowledge in regards to this concept is, relational integration.
> > > Multitasking is generally involves the switching between independent
> > > tasks not relational ones.
>
> > > So yes, if anyone has any ideas on how they think they may be able to
> > > train coordination, please cough em' up!
>
> > > On Sep 23, 2:02 pm, "J." <joseph.a.albrecht...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > @ailambris:
>
> > > > I think that latent inhibition is related to the inventiveness of the
> > > > patterns perceived because people with low latent inhibition get more
> > > > information to perceive patterns in, but I don't think that low latent
> > > > inhibition boosts the ability to perceive patterns generally.
--
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-training@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to brain-training+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/brain-training?hl=en.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق