Brief Overview

Cogmetrix is a private Australian company that provides sector-specific neuroscience based alternatives to people assessment & talent identification; providing practical solutions for companies and employees. We provide cloud technology that’s designed to assess, profile, diagnose, rank, match and improve the potential of an organisation’s greatest resource – its people.


The Cogmetrix Project Team

Predictive People Analytics

Human Resources

Steve Zanon 300x300.001.jpeg

Education & Neuroscience

Duncan Ferguson; CEO & Founder
Duncan is the CEO and founder of Cogmetrix and has been in the neuroscience software sector since 2007.  Representing Cognisess in Australasia, Cogmetrix operates in the organisational development, tactical recruiting, education and road safety sectors.

As part of the FleetRisk JV responsibilities (see below), Duncan contributes 'thought-leadership' articles to the National Road Safety Partnership Program (NRSPP).

Key Affiliate - Noel Pearse
Noel Pearse is focussed on providing outcome focussed Human Resource and Employee Relations strategy, support and tools to develop and enhance organisational capability.

The MD, Noel Pearse, has spent his career in blue chip international organisations and has developed exceptional breadth and depth across the full portfolio of Human Resource responsibilities. Mr. Pearse has served as NSW President and non Executive Director of the Australian Human Resources Institute and was awarded the Australian Human Resource Institute medal for contribution to the Human Resources function

Key Affiliate - Steve Zanon
Steve Zanon has neuroscience expertise and project management experience. 

Steve has been instrumental in building new pedagogies and quality assurance processes within the Independent Schools Victoria (ISV) Cognizance Project - offering teachers the ability to personalise learning for students and have them understand the cognitive & emotionall basis of their thinking and learning. It aims to empower students to learn more efficiently by understanding how their brain operates, therefore reinforcing that each student is responsible for their own learning.


Special Purpose Vehicles

FLEETRISK.com.au
46% of workplace injuries and fatalities involve motor-vehicles. This figure is completely unacceptable. FleetRisk is an objective data-driven approach that provides practical measures to address driver-behaviour risk.


Technology & Data Consultancy Partners


Science & Research

The focus of research and collaboration is in the following areas: Cognition, Emotional Intelligence, Personality, Wellbeing, Social Intelligence and Health. Translational research that helps to identify, understand and unleash the potential of people both as individuals and within teams.

The Cognisess platform provides online versions of tests that have extensive use in research, the armed forces and clinical practice. Our measures are adapted from validated psychometrics with uses ranging from diagnosing mental health disorders, research from the broader psychological community, and contemporary assessments.

Student First Study

Study Aims
Strong cognitive and emotional skills are essential tools for successful learning. An individual with well-developed mental capabilities will be better able to stay focused, ignore distractions, collaborate, plan next steps, remember instructions and start and finish projects.

Conversely, when theses abilities are poor it becomes much more difficult to achieve academic excellence; even mastering basic processes such as reading, thinking, prioritising, understanding and problem-solving can prove, at best, a frustrating experience.

The key study aims are:

  • Whether the understanding of Cognitive, Emotional & Social Function (CESF) might yield transfer on students including disadvantaged learners.
  • That a platform of games and assessments elicit transfer of some CESF, which translates to real-world measures of school performance.
  • The intervention equalises outcomes across socio-economic groups.

Practical Applications

  • Enabling students to identify and understand their cognitive, emotional and social perceptions, strengths and weaknesses.
  • Providing easily incorporated online training tools and techniques for the individual cognitive and emotional performance enhancement of students.
  • Creating templates of excellence for educational and student-matching purposes.
  • Providing educators with objective measurements that give teachers a more accurate sense of the student's true abilities.
  • Providing a model for the large-scale adoption of computer-based diagnosis and intervention to improve cognitive and emotional performance of students.
  • Incorporating learning analytics that can predict future learning and achievement based an affective learning outcomes (e.g. motivation, engagement with the games).


Goals and Outcomes

  • Increased understanding of each student's cognitive, social and emotional literacy levels.
  • Sustained improvement os student's mental and emotional capital.
  • Better data on 'how to teach' each student with content-based on improved matching of individual ability and skills.
  • Teachers can refine and improve content, delivery rate, and student collaboration and class dynamics.
  • Capitalise on student potential.
  • Results, analysis for student, class, year and school.

Diagnosis of Children with Autism

Background to the Study
In September 2014 Autitouch launched an investigation into the use of a multitouch table to support the diagnostic examination of children with autism.

The study is examining whether specific skills and / or behaviour of children with and without autism can be distinguished from each other by using this multitouch table. Autitouch is using adapted Cognisess assessments – both cognitive and emotional – for use in the Study.

Autitouch wants the deployment of innovative multitouch technology to improve the diagnosis phase and treatment of children with a form of autism.

The study is being conducted by TNO and is implemented in cooperation with Autitouch BV and Cognisess. For this study, we are focusing on children from 4 to 12 years, both with a form of autism and without.

Stanford Graduate Business School CEO Study

Background to the Study
The skills mandatory for excellence among CEOs will likely be highly informative about the skills needed in other managerial and leadership contexts.

The aim is to create both a diagnostic tool to evaluate an individual’s suitability for the job of CEO and an educational tool for developing effective future corporate leaders.

It is hoped the study will identify a set of essential cognitive and emotional skills that can guide educators, business schools and human resources personnel. Results and findings will be published later in the year.


Global Entrepreneurs Study 

Background to Study
Cognisess, a Bath-based people analytics software company, is teaming up with Microsoft Ventures Accelerator London, to profile entrepreneurs as part of an international study into the make-up of start-up founders.

The Global Entrepreneur Study (GES) aims to better understand which cognitive, emotional and social skills are universal and key to founding and driving a start-up, leadership style and building relationships.

From the data collected Cognisess hopes to shed more light on the similarities and differences in human cognition & emotional intelligence across continents, cultures and demographics.

The Global Study is being launched as part of the application process to the next Microsoft Ventures Accelerator in London – a 14-week programme aimed at helping early stage startups compress their time to launch.

Entrepreneurs complete a series of online games that objectively assess cognitive, social and emotional performance as well as personality, health and wellbeing indicators.

The Study will publish at regular intervals and aims to continue gathering data for 18 months; it is hoped that over 1000 startups will take part and that the survey will be the most comprehensive of its kind.


The Global Cognitive Empathy Study (GCES)

Background to Study
The (GCES) is a cross-cultural research project; it aims to better understand which cognitive and emotional (intelligence) skills are universal and key to things like leadership, organisational style and relationships.  From the data collected we hope to shed more light than ever before, on the similarities and differences in human cognition & emotional intelligence across continents, cultures and demographics.

Serious research, development, and testing lies behind our online games and we intend sharing our results database with our scientific partners to broaden our understanding of cognitive and emotional function, performance and enhancement.

Cognisess is partnering with organisations and individuals from around the world  – the assessments are free to do and everyone is able to access their profiles and reports showing progress, scores and country ranking.


Cognisess Platform Validation

Gyrate
Domain = Visual Perception:
Attribute = Spatial Orientation


Background
Gyrate is similar to Mental Rotation Tasks which are extensively used to measure the rate of spatial processing in research, clinical and by the armed forces. Using neuroimaging technology, these tasks have been shown to use areas of the brain related to both motor and visual processes.

Valid and Reliable Measurement

  • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved, 1 & 2
  • Internal Consistency (alphas) .77-.85 3 & 7
  • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .68-.84  4
  • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 5
  • Convergent Validity: Yes 6

Previous work has validated this type of measure, including work using international samples, and can be reviewed in the sources below. Testing performed by Cognisess 7 has demonstrated our adaptation to be internally consistent across trials. These studies can be reviewed below.

Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when we repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded.

In Gyrate, the visual stimuli are randomised so that participants can repeat the test without improving from familiarity. This also allows Cognisess to test for consistency across unique trials of the same task.

Sources:

  1. Koshino, H., Carpenter, O., Kellet, T., & Just, M.. (2005). Interactions between the doral and ventral pathways in mental rotation: An fMRI study. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioural Neuoscience, 5(1), 54-66. do:10.3758/CABN.5.1.54
  2. Eisenegger, C., Herwig, U., & Janke, L. (2007) The involvement of primary motor cortex in mental rotation revealed by transcranial magnetic stimulation. European Journal of Neuroscience, 25(4), 1240-1244. do:10.1111/j. 1460-9568.2007.05354.
  3. Collins, D.W., & Kimura, D. (1997) A large sex difference on a two-dimensional mental rotation task. Behavioural Neuroscience, 111(4), 845-849. doi 10.1037/0735-7044.111.4.845.
  4. McGee, M.G. (1978) Effects of Training and Practice on Sex Differences in Mental Rotation test scores. The Journal of Psychology, 100(1), 87-90, doi:10.1080/00223980. 1979.9923476.
  5. Peters, M.G., Lehman, W., Takashira, S., Takeuchi, T., & Jordan, K. (2006). Mental Rotation in test scores. The Journal of Psychology, 100 (1), 87-90. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70206-5.
  6. Schweizer, J., Goldhammer, F., Rauch, W., &Moosbrugger, G. (2007). On the validity of the Raven's matrices test: Does spatial ability contribute to performance?. Cortex, 42 (7), 1005-1014. do:10:1016/j.paid.2007.06.008.
  7. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

EyeBall
Domain = Visual Perception

Attribute = Eye-Hand Coordination

Background
EyeBall is based on Visual Scan and Point and Click Tasks which are extensively used in research by the armed forces as assessment of Eye-Hand Coordination and more generally coordinated efforts of visual scanning and motor behaviour.

Feedback between visual enters and motor areas of the brain allow us to navigate the world around and complete simple and complex tasks efficiently and accurately.

Valid and Reliable Measurement

  • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved 1, 2 & 3
  • Internal Consistency (alphas) .91-.95 4 & 5
  • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .71  5
  • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 5
  • Convergent Validity: Yes 1

Previous  work has used this type of measure, often paired with eye-tracking tools, to study Eye-Hand Coordination. Testing performed by Cognisess 5 has demonstrated our adaptation to be internally consistent across trials and to have successful test-retest reliability. 

These findings come from work using international sample and can be reviewed in the sources below.

Through randomising trial and stimuli, Cognisess ensures that active attempts to coordinate eye and motor abilities are being assessed rather than simple muscle memory.

Sources:

  1. Dean, H.l>, Tsui, E., Rinzel, J., & Pesaran, B. (2011) Reaction tim correlations during eye-hand coordination: Behaviour and modelling. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(7), 2399-2412. do:10/1523/JNEUROSCI.4591-10.2011.
  2. Gardner, J.L. (2002) Coordinated target selection for ocular orienting and tracking movements. University of California, San Francisco with the University of California (Berkeley). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 224p.
  3. Smith, B.A., Ho, J., Ark, W., & Zhai, S. (2000) Hand eye coordination patterns in traget selection. Proceedings of the 200 symposium of Eye tracking research and applications, ETRA '00 (pp.117-122). New York, NY, USA:ACM.
  4. Carretta, T.R.. (1992) Short-Term Retest Reliability of an Experimental U.S. Air Force Pilot Candidates Selection test Battery. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2(3), 161-173. do:10.1207/s15329108ijap0203_1.
  5. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012).

Mondial
Domain = Visual Perception
Attribute = Visual Field

Background

Mondial is similar to Divided Attention Tasks that use multiple sources of visual information which are extensively used in research. These tasks have been shown to use attention-related process of the brain using neuroimaging technology. When one divides the attention they require he cognitive resources not only to complete the present tasks, but also to decide when to pay attention to which stimuli.

Experimentally, it has been shown that doing two tasks at the same time requires more cognitive resources than the sum of two tasks performed separately, highlighting that dividing one's attention is a skill in itself.

Valid and Reliable Measurement

  • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved,1 & 4
  • Internal Consistency (alphas) .78 5
  • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .79-.90  1 & 2
  • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 3
  • Convergent Validity: Yes 3

Previous work has validated this type of measure, including work using international samples, and can be reviewed in the sources below. Testing performed by Cognisess 5 has demonstrated our adaptation to be internally consistent across trials. 

Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when we repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded.

In Mondial the visual stimuli used are randomised so that participants can repeat the test without improving from familiarity. This also allows Cognisess to test for consistency across unique trials of the same task.

Sources:

  1. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Sheffer, L. (2001). The Relationship between the Ability To Divide Attention and Standard Measures of General Cognitive Abilities. Intelligence, 29(4), 293-306.
  2. Arend, A.M., & Zimmer, H.D., (2012) Succesful training of filtering mechanisms in multiple object tracking does not transfer to filtering mechanisms in a visual working memory task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Neuropsychologia, 50 (10), 2379-2388. do:10.1016.j.neuropsychologia.2012.06.007.
  3. Chan, R.C., Hoosain, R., & Leem T.M. (2002) Reliability and validity of the Cantonese version of The Everyday Attention among normal Hong Kong Chinese: a preliminary report. Clinical Rehabilitation, 16(8), 900-909.
  4. Sears, C.R., & Pylyshyn, Z.W. (2000). Multiple object tracking and attentional processing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psycholgie experimentale, 54 (1), 1-14, doi:10.1037/h0087326
  5. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

NumberRecall
Domain = Attention & Awareness
Attribute = Short-term Memory


Background
NumberRecall is based on the Reliable Digit Span Task which is extensively used in research, by clinicians and by the remed forces as an assessment of Short Term and Working Memory.

This task requires the participant to recall recently acquired information and make accurate responses.

Valid and Reliable Measurement

  • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved,1 & 2
  • Internal Consistency (alphas) .70-.90 2
  • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .70-.80  2
  • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 2, 3 & 4
  • Convergent Validity: Yes 2 & 4

Previous work has validated this type of measure as an accurate assessment of one's short term and working memory capacity. Testing performed by Cognisess 5 has demonstrated our adaptation to be internally consistent across trials. 

These findings come from work using international samples and can be reviewed in the sources below.

Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when participants repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation of the assessment.

In this assessment, participants are given random number patterns each trial so that familiarity of the assessment has no effect. Each correct answer leads to a longer string that needs to be memorised to establish a participant's capacity.

Sources:

  1. Schroeder EW, Twumasi-Ankrah O, Baade LW, Marshall PS. (2012) Reliable Digit Span: A Systematic Review and Cross-validation Study. Assessment. 19:21-30.
  2. Conway, A., Kane, M., Bunting, M., Hambrick, D., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. (2005) Working memory span tasks: A methodical review and user's guide. Psychonomic Bulletin g& Review, 12(5), 769-786.
  3. Chincotta, D., & Underwood, G. (1997) Digit Span and  Articulatory Suppression: A Cross-linguistic comparison. European Journal of cognitive Psychology, 9(1), 89-96.
  4. Hsieh, S.-L. J., & Tori, C.D. (2007). Normative data on cross-cultural neuropsychological tests obtained from Mandarin-speaking adults across the life span. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22(3), 283-296.
  5. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

PinDrop
Domain = Attention & Awareness
Attribute = Divided Attention

Background
PinDrop is similar to Divided Attention Tasks that use auditory and visual information which are extensively used in research. These tasks have been shown to use attention-related process of the brain using neuroimaging technology. When one divides the attention they require he cognitive resources not only to complete the present tasks, but also to decide when to pay attention to which stimuli.

Experimentally, it has been shown that doing two tasks at the same time requires more cognitive resources than the sum of two tasks performed separately, highlighting that dividing one's attention is a skill in itself.

Valid and Reliable Measurement

  • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved,1 & 2
  • Internal Consistency (alphas) .77-.84 3 & 4
  • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .90  2
  • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 3
  • Convergent Validity: Yes 3

Previous work has shown divided attention tasks using audio and visual information have good statistical reliability, even when testing with diverse populations.

Testing performed by Cognisess 4 has demonstrated our adaptation to be internally consistent across trials. The work can be reviewed in the sources below.

Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when we repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded.

In PinDrop, the position of the visual stimuli and the auditory clips used are randomised so that participants can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded. This also allows Cognisess to test for consistency across unique trials of the same task.

Sources:

  1. Falkenstein, M., Hohnbein, J., & Blanke, L. (1991) Effect of cross modal divided attention on late ERP components. II. Error processing in choice reaction tasks. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 78(6), 47-455.
  2. Ben-Shakhar, G., & Sheffer, L. (2001). The Relationship between the Ability To Divide Attention and Standard Measures of General Cognitive Abilities. Intelligence, 29(4), 293-306.
  3. Chan, R.C., Hoosain, R., & Leem T.M. (2002) Reliability and validity of the Cantonese version of The Everyday Attention among normal Hong Kong Chinese: a preliminary report. Clinical Rehabilitation, 16(8), 900-909.
  4. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

MatriX
Domain = Attention & Awareness
Attribute = Focus & Concentration

Background

MatriX is based on the Visual Scan and Letter Search Tasks which are extensively used in research by the army forces as assessment of Attention and Visual Search. These tasks have been shown to use attention-related processes and visual region of the brain using neuroimaging technology,

Valid and Reliable Measurement

  • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved 1, 4 & 5
  • Internal Consistency (alphas) .79-.87 2
  • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .86-.97  3 & 7
  • Generalisability over different populations: Yes, if adjusted 6
  • Convergent Validity: Yes 4 & 5

Previous  work has validated this type of measure and testing by Cognisess 8 has demonstrated our adaptation to have reliability across trials. These findings come from work using international sample and can be reviewed in the sources below.

Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when we repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded.

In the assessment MatriX, participants search for a 'X' in a letter grid. Each time they take the task they get a different set of letter grids so that they don't simply memorise where the 'X' was from previous practice. This also allows Cognisess to test for consistency across unique trials of the same task.

Sources:

  1. Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980) A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology. 12: 97-136.
  2. Kane, M.J., Poole, B.J., Tuholski, S.W., & Engle, R.W. (2006) Working memory capacity and the top-down control of visual search: Exploring the boundaries of "executive attention" Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory and cognition, 32(4), 749-777.
  3. Jones, M.B., & Kenedy, R.S. (1995) TEMPORAL FACTORS IN VISUAL PERCEPTION: A DIFFERENTIAL APPROACH. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 81(3), 859-867.
  4. Ashbridge W, Walsh V, Cowey A: Temporal aspcts of visual search studied by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neuropsychologia 1997, 35: 121-131.
  5. Sweet, L.H., Paskavitz, J.F., O'Connor, M.j., Browndyke, J.N., Wellen, J.W., & Cohen, R.A. (2005). FMRI correlates of the WAIS-III symbol search subtest. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society: JINS, 11(4), 471-476.
  6. Rayner, J., Li, X., Williams, C.C., Cave, K.R., Well. A.D., & rayner@pscyh.umass.edu. (2007). Eye movements during information processing tasks: Individual differences and cultural effects. Vision Research, 47(21), 2714-2726.
  7. Baddeley, A., Gardner, J.M., & Grantham-McGregor, S. (1995) Cross-cultural cognition: Developing tests for developing countries. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9(7), S173-S195.
  8. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

ColourSwitch
Domain = Adaptability & Learning
Attribute = Impulse Control / Inhibition

Background

ColourSwitch is based on the Stroop Task, which is extensively used in research by clinicians in the assessment of Executive Functioning, Selective Attention, Processing Speed and Performance under Pressure.

Executive functioning is the ability to control and manage other cognitive processes; it allows people to organise thoughts and actions, manage time, and prioritise tasks. Using neuroimaging technology, this ask has been shown to use areas of the brain associated with attention-related processes and executive functioning.

Valid and Reliable Measurement

  • Construct and Criterion Validation: Current 1, 3 & 4
  • Internal Consistency (alphas) .90 6
  • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .78-.93  2 & 3
  • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 1 & 5
  • Convergent Validity: Yes 3 & 4

Previous  work has validated this type of measure, including work using international samples, and can be reviewed in the sources below. Testing performed by Cognisess 6 has demonstrated our adaptation to be internally consistent across trials and to have successful test-retest reliability.

Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when we repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded.

For example, the order that the word/colour pairs are presented can be randomised so that answer memorisation is made impossible This also allows Cognisess to test for consistency across unique trials of the same task.

Sources:

  1. Streep. J.R. (1935) Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 18 (6): 643-662.
  2. Jensen, A.R. (1965). Scoring the Streep test, Acta Psychologica, 24(0), 398-408. 
  3. MacLeod, C.M (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109(2), 163-203.
  4. Chaytor, N, Schmitter-Edgecombe, M., & Burr, R. (2006) Improving the ecological validity of executive functioning assessment. Archives of Clinical Neurosychology, 21(3), 217-227.
  5. Lee, T.M.C., and Chan, C.C H. (2000).  Stroop interference in Chinese and English. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 22(4), 465-471.

Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

    ShapeShifter
    Domain = Information Processing

    Attribute = Response Accuracy

    Background

    ShapeShifter is similar to the Pattern Comparison (Successive Task) from the Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery developed by the Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory.

    Tasks like these have been used in research and the armed forces in the assessment of visual recognition of information and patterns as well as short-term memory. The design of this task requires that participants make rapid responses using recently acquired information.

    Valid and Reliable Measurement

    • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved 1, 2 & 3
    • Internal Consistency (alphas) .68-.91 1, 3 & 4
    • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .71-.72  3 & 4
    • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 4
    • Convergent Validity: Yes 3

    Previous  work has validated this type of measure and testing by Cognisess 4 has demonstrated ShapeShifter's reliability with international samples. These findings can be reviewed in the sources below.

    Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when we repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded.

    In ShapeShifter the order the stimuli are presented is randomised so that answer memorisation is made impossible. This also allows Cognisess to test for consistency across unique trials of the same task.

    Sources:

    1. Perez WA, Masline PJ, Ramsey EG, Urban KE. Unified Tri-Services Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery: Review and methodology (Technical report AAMRL-TR-87). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory.
    2. Thorne, D.R Genser, S.G., Sing, H.C., & Hegge, F.W. (1985) The Walter Reed performance assessment battery. Neurobehavioral toxicology and teratology, 7 (4), 415-418.
    3. Kennedy, R.S., Turnage, J.J., and Osteen, M.K. (1989). Performance of Performance Tests: Comparison of Psychometric Properties of 24 Tests from Two Microcomputer-Based Batteries. Army Aeromedical Research Lab Publications, Fort Rucker. Retrieved from http://stinet.dtic.mil.oia &verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA252353.
    4. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

    RapidFlag
    Domain = Information Processing
    Attribute = Perceptual Speed

    Background

    RapidFlag is similar to the Pattern Comparison (Successive Task) from the Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery developed by the Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory.

    Tasks like these have been used in research and the armed forces in the assessment of visual recognition of information and patterns as well as short-term memory. The design of this task requires that participants make rapid responses using recently acquired information.

    Valid and Reliable Measurement

    • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved 1, 2 & 3
    • Internal Consistency (alphas) .68-.91 1, 3 & 4
    • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) .71-.72  3 & 4
    • Generalisability over different populations: Yes 4
    • Convergent Validity: Yes 3

    Previous  work has validated this type of measure and testing by Cognisess 4 has demonstrated RapidFlag's reliability with international samples. These findings can be reviewed in the sources below.

    Unlike standard paper versions of psychometrics, online psychometrics from Cognisess vary slightly so that when we repeat a test we can rule out simple memorisation when improvement is recorded.

    In RapidFlag the order the stimuli are presented is randomised so that answer memorisation is made impossible. This also allows Cognisess to test for consistency across unique trials of the same task.

    Sources:

    1. Perez WA, Masline PJ, Ramsey EG, Urban KE. Unified Tri-Services Cognitive Performance Assessment Battery: Review and methodology (Technical report AAMRL-TR-87). Wright-Patterson AFB, OH: Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory.
    2. Thorne, D.R Genser, S.G., Sing, H.C., & Hegge, F.W. (1985) The Walter Reed performance assessment battery. Neurobehavioral toxicology and teratology, 7 (4), 415-418.
    3. Kennedy, R.S., Turnage, J.J., and Osteen, M.K. (1989). Performance of Performance Tests: Comparison of Psychometric Properties of 24 Tests from Two Microcomputer-Based Batteries. Army Aeromedical Research Lab Publications, Fort Rucker. Retrieved from http://stinet.dtic.mil.oia&verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA252353.
    4. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

    SleepyHead
    Domain = Sleep Deprivation / Tiredness
    Attribute = Alertness


    Background
    EyeBall is based on Psychomotor Vigilance and Reaction TimeTasks which are extensively used in research, by clinicians and by the armed forces as assessment of mental alertness or vigilance and the body's ability to quickly respond.

    These tasks have experimentally shown to assess fatigue and can be used as an indicator of one's quality if sleep.

    Valid and Reliable Measurement

    • Construct and Criterion Validation: Current 1, 3 & 5
    • Internal Consistency (alphas) .82-.97 4 & 7
    • Test Retest Reliability (alphas) N/A
    • Generalisability over different populations: Yes, if adjusted  6 & 7
    • Convergent Validity: Yes 5

    Previous  work has used this type of measure, esting performed by Cognisess 7 has demonstrated our adaptation to be internally consistent across trials and to have reliability across trials. 

    These findings come from work using international sample and can be reviewed in the sources below.

    Test-Retest reliability is not applicable to this assessment as it is anticipated that one's vigilance and fatigue are greatly affected by day to day changes such as reduced sleep.

    Sources:

    1. Dinges, D.F., & Powell, J.W. (1985) Microcomputer analyses of performance on a portable, simple visual RT task during sustained operations. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 17(6), 652-655. 
    2. Doran SM, Van Dongen HPA, Dinges DF. Sustained attention performance during sleep deprivation: Evidence of state of instability. Arch Ital Biol 2001:139:253-67.
    3. Dorrigan J, Rodgers NL, Dinges DF. Psychomotor vigilance performance: a neurocognitive assay sensitive to sleep loss. In: Kushida C, editor. Sleep Deprivation. New York: Marcel Dekker; in press.
    4. Lim, J.,& Dinges, D.F. (2008) Sleep Deprivation and Vigilant Attention. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1129(1), 305-322, doi:10.1196/annals.1417.002.
    5. Loh, S., Lamind, N., Dorrian, J., Roach, G., & Dawson, D. (2004) The validity of psychomotor vigilance tasks of less than 10-minute duration. Behaviour Research Methods, 36(2), 339-346. do:10.3758/BF03195580.
    6. Berry, J.W. (2002). Cross-Cultural Psychology: Research and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
    7. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012)

    EmotionTest
    Domain = Empathy
    Attribute = Expressional Intelligence


    Background
    While all humans experience emotions, they markedly differ in the extent to which her identify, understand, regulate, and use their emotions and the emotions of others.

    Emotional Intelligence (EI) has been instrumental to account for and describe this variability.

    One key component of EI is empathic accuracy, which measures the ability to be ware of and correctly understand others' thoughts and feelings.

    Valid and Reliable Measurement

    • Construct and Criterion Validation: Achieved 1,2,3,4
    • Test-ReTest Reliability (alphas): .75 5
    • Generalisability over different populations: Yes, (if adjusted) 5
    • Convergent Validity: Yes 1,2,&3 

    Previous work has validated this type of measure and testing by Cognisess 5 has demonstrated our adaption to have reliability across trials.

    These findings come from work using international samples ad can be viewed in the sources below.

    Emotional Intelligence can be accurately measured in the working world and has been shown to predict managerial competence, higher team efficiency, and reduced stress and greater employee satisfaction 1,2,,better team dynamics 3 , resistance to burnout and the spreading of positive emotion 4.

    Sources

    1. Zampetakis. L.A., & Moustakis, V. (2011) Managers; trait emotional intelligence and group outcomes: The case of job satisfaction. Small Group Research, 42, 77-102.
    2. Mikoloajczak, M., Balon, N., Ruosi, M., Kotsuo, I. (2012) Sensitive but not sentimental: Emotionally intelligent people can out their emotions aside when necessary. Organisational Development Journal, 30, 421-434.
    3. Chang, J.W., Sy, T., Choi, J.N. (2011) Team Emotional Intelligence and Performance: Interactive Dynamics between Leaders and Members. Small Group Research, 2012 43:75.
    4. Rajah, R., Song, Z., & Arvey, .R. (2011). Emotionality and leadership: Taking stock of the past decade of research. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1107-1119.
    5. Review of Cognisess Psychometrics Part 1 (2012).