Free brain tests, backed by research

11 tests of 20 to 90 seconds, each taken from a published task in cognitive psychology, with its norm and its reliability. Four have a public norm of more than 24,000 games (Human Benchmark, 2026).

Reflexes

About this stat
Reaction time test Simple visual reaction time Duel 20 s median 228 ms F1 reaction test Reaction to the lights going out Start 25 s Headgame norm being collected Schulte table test Visual search speed Grid 30 s Headgame norm being collected

Memory

About this stat
Sequence memory test Visuospatial short-term memory Sequence 1 min median 9 Chimp test Memory for position and order Constellation 1 min median 10 Number memory test Digit span The Code 1 min median 9

Focus

About this stat
Go/no-go test Response inhibition Go/no-go 20 s Headgame norm being collected Stroop test Interference control Color 20 s Headgame norm being collected Flanker test Selective attention Flock 20 s Headgame norm being collected

Bonus

Mental math test Arithmetic speed Quick Math 40 s Headgame norm being collected Verbal fluency test Word finding under time pressure 7 Letters 90 s Headgame norm being collected

The 11 tests compared

TestDurationPublic normPublished reliabilityIn the card score
Reaction time test 20 s Human Benchmark 0.83 over 3 weeks (Woods et al., 2015b) Yes
F1 reaction test 25 s Reaction time norm Not published yet No
Schulte table test 30 s Headgame norm being collected Parent task, Trail Making A, 0.87 (Woods et al., 2015c) Yes
Sequence memory test 1 min Human Benchmark Parent task, Corsi, 0.85 (Morawietz et al., 2024) Yes
Chimp test 1 min Human Benchmark Not published for this format Yes
Number memory test 1 min Human Benchmark Not published for this format No
Go/no-go test 20 s Headgame norm being collected Commission errors 0.76 (Hedge et al., 2018) Yes
Stroop test 20 s Headgame norm being collected Stroop cost 0.60 and 0.66 (Hedge et al., 2018) No
Flanker test 20 s Headgame norm being collected Flanker cost 0.40 and 0.57 (Hedge et al., 2018) No
Mental math test 40 s Headgame norm being collected Not published yet No
Verbal fluency test 90 s Headgame norm being collected Not published for this game No

Where to start

If you only have a minute, play the reaction time test. It has the largest public norm and the best known reliability. Then try one test per stat, sequence memory for memory and go/no-go for focus. These are the three games the app uses for your first card.

Why your scores change from day to day

Scores rise when you repeat a test, simply because you get used to it (Scharfen et al., 2018a). Across 68 studies of working memory tests, scores went up between the first and second session and kept rising up to the fourth (Scharfen et al., 2018b). One short session is also noisy, while the average of many short sessions is very stable (Sliwinski et al., 2018).

Two habits help, compare yourself with yourself on the same device, and judge a week, not a morning. This is how the app computes your card.

The Headgame games

Sources

  1. Human Benchmark, score distributions embedded in humanbenchmark.com, read on 13 October 2026. Reaction time n 70 940, sequence memory n 35 868, chimp test n 27 233, number memory n 24 084. humanbenchmark.com
  2. Scharfen J., Peters J.M., Holling H. (2018). Retest effects in cognitive ability tests, a meta-analysis. Intelligence 67, 44 to 66. doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2018.01.003
  3. Scharfen J., Jansen K., Holling H. (2018). Retest effects in working memory capacity tests, a meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 25, 2175 to 2199. doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1461-6
  4. Sliwinski M.J., Mogle J.A., Hyun J. et al. (2018). Reliability and validity of ambulatory cognitive assessments. Assessment 25(1), 14 to 30. PMC5690878. doi.org/10.1177/1073191116643164
  5. Woods D.L., Wyma J.M., Yund E.W., Herron T.J. (2015). The effects of repeated testing, simulated malingering, and traumatic brain injury on high-precision measures of simple visual reaction time. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 9, 540. PMC4637414. doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00540
  6. Woods D.L., Wyma J.M., Herron T.J., Yund E.W. (2015). The effects of aging, malingering, and traumatic brain injury on computerized Trail-Making Test performance. PLoS One 10(6), e0124345. PMC4465490. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124345
  7. Morawietz C. et al. (2024). Consistency of spatial ability performance in children, adolescents, and young adults. Frontiers in Psychology 15, 1365941. PMC10938598. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1365941
  8. Hedge C., Powell G., Sumner P. (2018). The reliability paradox. Behavior Research Methods 50(3), 1166 to 1186. PMC5990556. doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0935-1

Headgame

Your full card, every Sunday.

Three 20 second games each morning, phone down sessions, and a card with six stats revealed every Sunday. Coming soon to the App Store, Google Play next.

Join the waitlist