This text presents the results of a 12-question vocabulary quiz. The quiz tested knowledge of relatively uncommon words, asking participants to select the correct definition from a list of four options. While the specific answers provided by the quiz taker are not available as they are indicated by ”Ditt svar: ”, the correct answers and the percentage of other quiz takers who answered correctly are shown for each question. The statistical breakdown of overall performance across all participants is also provided, along with a link to contact the quiz editors for feedback.
The first section lays out the twelve quiz questions, each followed by four potential answers. The questions probe the meaning of words like ”astronaut,” ”barberare,” ”kofösare,” ”modesti,” ”pakt,” ”skuffelse,” ”varsam,” ”rekreera,” ”notabilitet,” ”landssvek,” ”konsternation,” and ”dikotyledon.” This selection of words suggests a focus on testing a breadth of vocabulary, ranging from everyday terms with potentially less common usage (like ”barberare” – barber) to more specialized vocabulary (like ”dikotyledon” – dicotyledon). The multiple-choice format allows participants to make educated guesses even if they are not entirely familiar with all the words.
Following the questions, the results section provides a detailed breakdown of performance. It begins with a general distribution of scores, showing the percentage of users who achieved each score from 0 to 12. This data offers an insight into the overall difficulty of the quiz. For example, a higher concentration of users scoring in the lower range suggests a more challenging quiz, while a distribution skewed towards the higher end indicates a relatively easier one. This specific quiz appears to have a moderate difficulty, with the highest percentages of users scoring in the 9 to 11 range.
The detailed answer key then follows, outlining each question again, along with the correct answer and the percentage of other quiz takers who selected that answer. This allows for an item-by-item analysis of performance, both individually and collectively. For instance, questions like ”Vad betyder barberare?” (What does barber mean?) and ”Vad betyder varsam?” (What does careful mean?) had a near-perfect or perfect success rate, suggesting they were easily understood by most participants. Conversely, questions like ”Vad betyder notabilitet?” (What does notability mean?) and ”Vad betyder konsternation?” (What does consternation mean?) had considerably lower success rates, indicating these words presented a greater challenge.
This individual question performance data is valuable in several ways. It reveals which words are more commonly understood and which are less familiar. This information could be used to tailor future quizzes, focusing on specific vocabulary areas or adjusting difficulty. For individual learners, it highlights areas where they may need to expand their vocabulary. The lack of explanation for the word meanings within the results emphasizes the quiz’s primary focus on testing existing knowledge rather than providing educational content.
The inclusion of the statistic on how other quiz takers performed on each question adds a social element to the experience. It allows participants to compare their performance to others and gauge how well they did on questions relative to the general population of quiz takers. This fosters a sense of competition and can be motivating for improvement. The wide range in percentages of correct answers across different questions underscores the variability in word familiarity among participants.
Finally, the quiz concludes with an option for feedback, encouraging users to report errors or provide suggestions. This feature is important for quality control and continuous improvement of the quiz content. It provides an avenue for user engagement and ensures the accuracy and relevance of the questions and answers. Overall, the structure of the quiz and the presentation of results create a straightforward yet engaging vocabulary assessment, offering a snapshot of word knowledge and highlighting areas for potential learning and growth. The lack of specific user answers prevents a deeper analysis of individual performance but allows for a comprehensive overview of the difficulty and understanding of the selected vocabulary across a wider user base.
