ScopeFocus
Groundwork
Every game here is a version of a published task. This page names which one, cites the paper it comes from, and is equally precise about what that citation does not mean.
Four steps, in this order. The order matters: the measurement is chosen before the game is, so the game is never the thing that decides what counts as a good score.
Following a well-studied paradigm carefully is a reason to take a measurement seriously. It is not evidence that this implementation measures what the original does, and no such evidence is claimed anywhere in this product.
Four things people reasonably assume about a product like this. None of them is true here, and it is better to read that on a page than to work it out from a score.
A score here tells you whether you or your child has a condition.
It does not, and it cannot. A score describes one round of one task on one day - how accurately and how quickly somebody answered. Attention varies with sleep, with mood, with the room, and with how many times a person has played before. No single task performance identifies anything about a person, which is why an actual assessment never rests on one.
A low score is a warning sign worth acting on.
A low score is a low score. This product deliberately shows you no threshold, no band and no percentile, because it has no norm set - no measured population to compare anybody against. Without that, the idea of a score being unusually low has no meaning here, and reading one as a sign is reading something that is not there.
These tasks are used in assessment, so this is a version of assessment.
Some of these paradigms do appear in assessment, alongside developmental history, observation across settings, interviews with the people who know the person, and standardised instruments administered by someone trained to administer them. A task on its own is not a short version of that process. It is one input that process sometimes uses, and this is not even that: it is a game built from the same idea.
Playing these will improve attention.
Playing a task makes somebody better at that task, and the history here will show that happening. Whether practice on a task improves attention anywhere else is the most contested question in this literature, and this product makes no claim about it. What it offers is a record of how you did, compared with how you did before.
About yourself, your child, or someone you work with. This is the part a page like this usually leaves out, and it is the only part that matters if the answer is yes.
Training and self-tracking - not a diagnostic tool.
Twenty-eight games, each a version of a published task, each with the dimension it measures and the paper the task comes from. The citations are real and link to their DOIs. Read them as the origin of the method and nothing more.