6 questions across 1 test in this category.
No. It measures one narrow thing: the tendency to check an intuitive answer before committing to it. In the research literature this tendency correlates with cognitive ability measures, but a 12-item multiple-choice assessment is not an intelligence test and your result is not an IQ. A low count here means the traps worked on you that day, nothing more.
You can, but the second result means something different. These items lose part of their bite once you have seen the explanations: you are no longer suppressing an intuition, you are remembering an answer. Prior exposure inflates results; that is exactly what happened to the classic reflection problems over two decades of fame, and it is why we wrote new ones. Treat a retake as revision, not as a fresh measurement.
Two reasons. First, the classic items are among the most widely circulated puzzles in the world; studies in 2016 found that about half of online respondents had already seen them, and prior exposure measurably inflates results. Charging you for a score on problems you may already know would be charging you for noise. Second, those items sit in journal articles under publisher copyright, with no license for commercial reproduction. Original items solve both problems at once.
No. It means that on these twelve problems, the planted intuitive answers got past your checking more often than not, which is the most common human outcome. People with strong formal training fall for these when tired or rushed. The useful part of a low count is the answer key: each explanation shows the exact move the trap made, and that pattern can be learned.
No. Reflection is the whole point, so nothing here pushes you to answer fast. Take the time to feel the pull of the obvious answer and then check it. What we do ask is that you answer without a calculator and without searching: the arithmetic is deliberately light, and an outside lookup would turn a reflection measure into a typing exercise.
We advise against it and flag this test as a poor fit for hiring decisions. It runs unsupervised, the answer to any reflection-style problem is searchable, and a motivated candidate can prepare. It works as self-knowledge and as a starting point for talking about decision habits on a team, not as a selection gate.
