190122-OS-00

January 2019

Development Rationale

MindmetriQ Gamified Assessments

MindmetriQ

2019 Test Partnership Ltd. MindmetriQ Product Development Rationale

Page 1 of 7

Gamified assessments and ‘g’

Gamified assessments have a lot of potential, if they’re done scientifically. Which is what we’ve done.

We’ve used advanced psychometric methods and calibration data from tens of thousands of test completions to bring proven science to gamified assessments.

Extensive research finds that general cognitive ability (sometimes referred to as ‘g’) is the best predictor of job performance (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). So guess what we developed our gamified assessments to measure...yes they all measure g!

11/12 12.1

3 / 12 8.3

Almost the same

Almost opposite

Other

Thunder

Lightning

9 /12 10.2

2 /12 12.6

Tip is to Advise asRemember is to...

+15s

Recall

Envisage

Forget

Imagine

Yearn5

4

6

-4

2

3

-1

5

g

6

1

4

-9

-32

5

Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262

TestPartnership

2019 Test Partnership Ltd. MindmetriQ Product Development Rationale

Page 2 of 7

Each one of our six assessments on its own has comparable validity and reliability to a traditional ability test (e.g. numerical or verbal reasoning test). So combine the six gamified assessments and the predictive power is significant.

g Spearman’s g; the best predictor of workplace performance

NumericalReasoning

VerbalReasoning

LogicalReasoning

2 /12 12.6

Tip is to Advise asRemember is to...

+15s

Recall

Envisage

Forget

Imagine

Yearn

3 / 12 8.3

Almost the same

Almost opposite

Other

Thunder

Lightning

4/10 3.6

6

1

4

-9

-32

5

5

4

6

-4

2

3

-1

5 9 /12 10.2 11/12 12.1

21 3 4 5 6

MindmetriQ gamified assessment series

TestPartnership

2019 Test Partnership Ltd. MindmetriQ Product Development Rationale

Page 3 of 7

Net the Numbers

Measures: Numerical reasoning.

Task: Candidates must drag the highlighted net over the numbers which when summed give the largest possible answer. Remember the highest number may be negative.

g facets: quantitative reasoning, working memory capacity, visual processing.

4/10 3.6

6

1

4

-9

-32

5

5

4

6

-4

2

3

-1

5

Numerical reasoning factor

Number Racer

Measures: Numerical reasoning.

Task: Candidates must check which numbers are falling and collect those which sum to the target number. Be careful to avoid the other falling numbers.

g facets: quantitative reasoning, perceptual speed, memory span.

1

2

TestPartnership

2019 Test Partnership Ltd. MindmetriQ Product Development Rationale

Page 4 of 7

Word Logic

Measures: Verbal reasoning.

Task: Candidates are asked to complete verbal analogies by tapping the best option.

g facets: reading decoding, processing verbal information, cloze reasoning (missing information).

3 / 12 8.3

Almost the same

Almost opposite

Other

Thunder

Lightning

2 /12 12.6

Tip is to Advise asRemember is to...

+15s

Recall

Envisage

Forget

Imagine

Yearn

Verbal reasoning factor

Link Swipe

Measures: Verbal reasoning.

Task: Candidates are presented with a pair of words and asked to decide whether they are synonyms, antonyms, or neither.

g facets: lexical knowledge, processing verbal information, grammatical sensitivity.

3

4

TestPartnership

2019 Test Partnership Ltd. MindmetriQ Product Development Rationale

Page 5 of 7

Shape Spinner

Measures: Logical reasoning.

Task: Candidates spin the wheel so that each symbol is next to one of the same shape or the same shading, but not both. Make sure you check every symbol.

g facets: speeded rotation, visualization, serial perceptual integration.

9 /12 10.2

11/12 12.1

Logical reasoning factor

Pipe Puzzle

Measures: Logical reasoning.

Task: Candidates must re-arrange the pipes to connect the two end points. Avoid the solid obstacles and make sure you have enough pipes.

g facets: spatial scanning, visual memory, flexibility of closure.

5

6

TestPartnership

2019 Test Partnership Ltd. MindmetriQ Product Development Rationale

Page 6 of 7

Literature review, gamified assessment justification

UX design and concept prototyping

Task design (item writing)

Candidate feedback

Calibration, reliability, difficulty, guess-ability, item quality

Item iteration and re-calibration

Validation and adverse impact analysis

Build norm groups

Beta launch

Candidate feedback and item iteration

Full launch

On-going item expansion

Development process

2.601,

3.520

, -1.7

24,

-2.801

, 2.98

0, -1.

928,

-2.956

, 1.03

5, 0.2

40,

2.776,

1.522

, -2.7

48,

0.937,

1.126

, 2.00

8,

-2.413

, 3.17

6, 1.2

98,

-1.126

, 2.01

8, -2.

613,

2.176,

1.298

, 0.96

7,

-0.204

, 1.28

0, 2.6

01,

3.520,

-1.72

4, -2.

801,

2.980,

-1.92

8, -2.

956,

1.035,

0.240

, 2.77

6,

1.522,

-2.74

8, 0.9

37,

1.126,

2.008

, -2.4

13,

3.176,

1.298

, -1.1

26,

2.018,

-2.61

3, 2.1

76

6

14

-9

-32

5

TestPartnership

2019 Test Partnership Ltd. MindmetriQ Product Development Rationale

Page 7 of 7

Want to know more?

Please get in touch to find out more.

With advanced technology and robust science, candidate selection is changing for the better. And we’re inviting you to be part of this progress.

info@testpartnership.com + 44 20 7960 2897

Test Partnership tests are used globally by organisations including:

TestPartnership