The human eye is usually able to distinguish more shades of green than any other color -- think hunters in forested areas. Perhaps this is changing as more people stare at their monitors all day or bask in the CRT blue. Also more people are near sighted these days.
My method: I first grouped them in a rough approximation, and then treated it like a bubble sort -- I compared two at a time and moved them if one was closer to the goal color.
I did the first row, clicked score, and noticed that I did well in that range. Then, I didn't waste my time with the others.
I wish I saved a screenshot to share my embarrassment.
I wonder how many other people in my age group there were, it didn't say... It does look like men from 20-29 mostly fared really well according to the graph, but it would be cool to see more detail anyway.
As a geek nitpick: Not sure I'd refer to this as "colour IQ", as I don't see how this relates to intelligence.
To me, there is some parallelism with the guys who are gifted at math or logic : there are a lot of things that come intuitively to them where others have to struggle. The difference is that we are more prone to call them smart than people with other sort of abilities (musicians, painters, etc.).
The eye's lens tends to develop a yellow tint over time, so that suggests the older age ranges would have more points in the cyan range. And colorblindness is more common in men, so that might show up too. Or, more likely, the charts would just show which group has the best monitors. Useful marketing information, anyway.
I would suck.
Update: got 19 (best is 0). Small problems across the map, in yellows, cyans, light purples, and pinks.
I would have thought that brightness would have been the main factor in a monitor, surely all the hues are relative. You aren't trying to pick something colour realistic from life, you are just ranking relative to the rest of the screen.
You have perfect color vision!
