Areas to be tested
All tests should be Pass/Fail. Those that aren't should be conformed or reconsidered.
Objectivity:
Testing for unproven assertions, assumptions, presuppositions, biases, agendas, weak axioms. What the test subject brings to table, if anything which could cause a logic fail.
-Testing for Supersitition #1. Test questions of cause-and-effect.
-Testing for Supersitition #2. Test questions of character assessment or bias.
-Testing for Predictive Assumptions. Storyline questions, tests of omission, etc.
-Testing for Self Presumption. This is just a reminder.
-Testing for Social Presumption. This is just a reminder.
-Testing for Reactive Choices. Given a set of relevant proposititions, this test is determine whether the subject chooses the neutral or reactive choice. Alternatives to neutral choices also can be tested.
-Testing for Active Denial (traditionalism/close-mindedness/xenophobia). Test needs to be worked into logic pass/fail. TBC.
-Testing for Active Acceptance (over-eagerness/gullibility/too-trusting). Test needs to be worked into logic pass/fail. TBC.
Doubt:
-Testing for Logic Avoidance Zero Yield thinking, in which the subject fails to follow up with a logical process, causing an accumulation of uncertainty, expressed as a logic fail function.
-Testing for Endurance Following. Based on previous indiction, a test of patience, attention, and ability to follow a meandering line of details, clues and asides.
-Testing for Credibility Assessment. This is just a reminder.
-Testing for Willingness to Doubt. Given established, yet improble sounding facts, the willingness to choose the improbable-sounding right answer, or feasable-sounding wrong answer.
-Testing for Willingness to Believe, or Faith. Flip the previous question. Look for alternatives as well.
Critical Thinking :
-Testing for Fault Finding. Given an assortment of useless or faulty puzzle elements, the ability to find ones that lead to solid conclusion will be tested. Alternatively, given a puzzle without any apparent flaw will be tested until one hidden flaw has been found.
-As a follow up, Testing for Willingness to Blame, to be critical. After fault has been found, the willingness to assign blame and punishment, either as a rating scale of severity, or as a multiple choice option.
-Testing for Skeptical Choices. Given the choice of tasks, one difficult but firmly established (right), the other: easy yet fanciful (wrong, or iffy). Will the test subject choose the harder logical choice, or the softer illogical choice.
-Testing for Function Assignment. Basic measures, probably just rip off some IQ tests. Useful as a general gauge on all testers.
Visual:
-Testing for Visual Perception. Images of Which Goes With Which/Which Does Not Belong tests. Similar ... What Is Wrong With picture tests. Useful to break monotony as well as topical logic indicators.
-Testing for Image Recall. Test subject is asked to study image, recall details (how many/size/shape/etc). Similar reasons.
Ethics:
As this is an important test element, a series of example-type questions, randomly interspersed, well-disguised and whose intent is not easy to discern .. ie, science/paranormal-looking, with definitive pass/fail results.
-Testing for Willingness to Cheat or Commit Fraud. Given a choice (other than for mere convienence/laziness/fanciful) of apparent gain potential, will the subject choose to lie or cheat.
-Testing for Endorsement or Perpetuation of Fraud. Several example questions where the subject is asked to choose correctness of behavior for different social status types (relevent). These must be non-consecutive.
-Testing for Fraud Detection. This is just a reminder.
Psychology:
As this element is usually the most controversial, questions should be direct and conclusive. Focusing on critical skills instead of personality traits. Differing from standard logic tests by the attempt to annoy the blank out of the subject, perplex, mystify, decohere. Logic + Magnified Psychological Factor. Relevence should be obvious.
-Testing for Attention to Detail. This could be a image test, story test, arrangement test of some manner in which the small details become important.
-Testing for Memory Order. A test involving series of similar (confusing) repetitive elements arranged or disarranged. The test is to remember orders ... alternatively, to reorder.
-Testing for Skewed Proportions. Several similar tests to determine the value or importance to the test subject of similar or different things compared. Because value judgements are somewhat relative, this test must establish a clear pattern of warped, disproportionate thinking to qualify as a logic fail. For instance, a car is headed towards your dog and your child. You have enough time to save the life of one of them. The subject who chooses the dog may have a reason for doing so, but it's a pretty clear logic fail by any standards.
-Testing for Exaggeration Propensity (this may be a more valid method than previous test). Given examples, will the subject choose to describe examples with a more vivid/urgent/dangerous descriptor, or choose a more neutral and accurate one.
These will be fleshed out over time, and more and varied tests.Statistics: Posted by Kevin Kane — 16 Feb 2010, 19:45
]]>