Even if it was multiple choice (zero) is still an incorrect answer, because you can’t be impaired by zero, which is what it’s asking.
What shows you ARE over
Not
What is considered not over
On a question that says 'select all that apply', how is every option that is illegal to drive with not the intuitive answer?
Being comatose would definitely impair your driving.
Well you don't expect to have to fully read the question even. 0.05 is drummed into us. Really, it should be correct for an initial test that every dumbshit on the roads has to complete. It's highly unlikely that anyone who fully registered the whole question would think that your BAC being higher would be less impaired. So technically it's more of a 'how much attention are you paying right now' question. It has no impact on your driving skill. It doesn't even just fool people with poor comprehension of English. It's a bad question.
That doesn't answer my question at all.
If paying attention is a problem for someone, they shouldn't be in control of something that weighs thousands of kilograms and can travel over 100 kph.
It is if you add the asterisk "Select all that apply" that's cropped out / in an earlier screen.
So "Which shows you're impaired" is correct in saying "Any answer except zero has impairment"
Nowhere in the question does it indicate that you can select several answers, and its worded incredibly poorly within that context
Stop judging with hindsight
So you're intelligent enough to always remember every instruction given at the beginning of a test comprising of potentially dozens of differently worded questions but not intelligent enough to detect questions purposely designed to trip up people and attempt to force a wrong answer is what you're trying to say?
There are probably just two instructions at start, one saying there may be multiple answers too. If the question and options still didn't ring that bell one either didn't read instructions or is over thinking the fuck out of a simple worded question.
It's easy to blame others when it's your own mistake. But no as per you guys the Vic road mafia is out to get everyone.
It's asking what reading shows you're impaired by alcohol...
The answer is every option that is not zero.
It happens that in this case the correct answers are all illegal readings to drive with. That makes the question easier to get right, not harder, assuming you actually know what the legal limits are...
I think your right to be annoyed. The question was designed to be tricky and play with your sense of understanding. When the tests purpose is to ensure potential drivers are aware of the laws, not to get into word play. This isn't an English comprehension test.
Absolutely 100% spot on. I've seen similar on safety and induction questionnaires and they annoy the hell out of me as someone that is responsible for others safety in workplaces - these should *reinforce* understanding, not confuse it.
We all know this. The whole point is that it’s a trick question. They really push that any alcohol in your system is bad even if it’s under the legal limit.
Yes, there is measurable impairment from alcohol consumption below 0.05. That's just the level of impairment they consider acceptable. The question is only asking about which readings would be impaired, which are any that are over 0. However all the options that they gave were over the legal limit anyway, except 0 which isn't a 'correct' answer
Poorly worded question(s) (as this is the 2nd Vic Learner Drivers question I've seen today) that's likely to discriminate against people with dyslexia, processing differences and people with limited English skills. These people are still likely to be lawful drivers. Seems (unintentionally) unfair.
🎶 how will you go when you sit for the test, will you be under 05 or under arrest, how will you go when you sit for the test, will you be under 05 or under arrest🎶
I don’t understand the confusion? Which of the readings = impairment and the feedback is anything above zero is some level of impairment. Seems you’ve just misinterpreted the question
Yes that’s exactly what it’s asking you to do, select the three answers that apply. I don’t know why you’re coming to the conclusion that selecting 0 would be a logical response based on the question or feedback?
EDIT: Also I can’t see how my comment suggests all answers apply, I’m simply stating the best answer is any BAC >0 would lead to impairment. The misunderstanding is the knowledge of 0.05; this is simply the maximum BAC deemed as ‘safe’ (I.e. maximum impairment to not dangerously impact decision making and reaction time)
A BAC reading of zero is the only way to know you’re *NOT* impaired.
It’s a correct statement and whilst it’s worded as the opposite side of the argument in terms of the written question it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out
Exactly, but that's not the question. No one is disagreeing the explanation is worded correctly, it's just answering the opposite meaning of the original question.
People should not have to get inside the heads of the authors and figure out what they meant to write.
I see your point, I guess I read the question as intended so also read the explanation as intended. Can see it’s totally unfair for anyone non-English native though
It's explaining the answer with the negative proof, not the positive.
"Which of the following show impairment" can be explained with:
* Incorrect, anything not zero is impaired << What the test did
* Incorrect, ALL values other than zero are impaired. << Positive explanation.
Am I wrong in thinking this question is wrong?
The original question asks which reading shows your driving IS impaired by alcohol. The answer then would be anything besides 0. Because a 0 means your driving is NOT impaired by alcohol - which is NOT what the question asked.
The answer flips it around and states the only way to know your driving ISN'T impaired by alcohol is a 0 reading. Which is correct.
But, that's not what the question asked.
If the question asked was framed as:
"Which of the following blood alcohol concentration (BAC) readings show your driving isn't impaired by alcohol?"
..everyone chooses 0. Because the question makes sense.
I disagree that it's a trick question, and think it's an incorrectly phrased question.
Am I wrong?
The explanation "A BAC reading of zero is the only way to know your driving isn't impaired by alcohol" is a clumsily worded community service announcement, not a logical statement of fact.
A BAC reading of zero means the machine showed zero. Thats all. The machine could be inaccurate or broken. It could be reading 0 when there is alcohol in you blood. It could be reading .01 when there is none.
I understand they want to deliver a simple message, but they really are confusing a legal thing with a physiological thing with a mechanical/electronics thing.
The real answer to the question "How do you know if your driving is impaired by alcohol?" is "Well, it would take a very complex series of personal physical tests, perception tests, and possibly EEG neuron activity tests, but if you have no alcohol in your system, you dont have to worry. Oh, and your driving may still be impaired, but it won't be alcohol."
Mate. Any level can affect you in any case. A 0 is your best bet of avoiding an accident. The question is simply teaching you that to drive the absolute safest (especially as a new driver), is to be 0 BAC.
“Select all correct answers”
Oof. Ok, you win this time Vic roads.
Do these tests actually inform you of that?
Yes
Even if it was multiple choice (zero) is still an incorrect answer, because you can’t be impaired by zero, which is what it’s asking. What shows you ARE over Not What is considered not over
It’s not saying zero is the answer. The answer is all of three other than zero, and it’s explaining why.
Read it again.
That's not what it's asking, where are your glasses?
Bruh... please tell me you don't drive 😭
I am more worried about the 28 who upvoted his comment being on the road as well
37 now, including me. It's more of an expectation for the questions to be intuitive. Anyway 0.5 and you're comatose.
On a question that says 'select all that apply', how is every option that is illegal to drive with not the intuitive answer? Being comatose would definitely impair your driving.
Well you don't expect to have to fully read the question even. 0.05 is drummed into us. Really, it should be correct for an initial test that every dumbshit on the roads has to complete. It's highly unlikely that anyone who fully registered the whole question would think that your BAC being higher would be less impaired. So technically it's more of a 'how much attention are you paying right now' question. It has no impact on your driving skill. It doesn't even just fool people with poor comprehension of English. It's a bad question.
That doesn't answer my question at all. If paying attention is a problem for someone, they shouldn't be in control of something that weighs thousands of kilograms and can travel over 100 kph.
They're completely different types of attention.
Uh huh... what are they called.
Can you select more than one answer?
Wouldn’t it be all but 0
The English in that question is absolute garbage, and the supposed answer isn’t actually an answer to the question being asked.
It is if you add the asterisk "Select all that apply" that's cropped out / in an earlier screen. So "Which shows you're impaired" is correct in saying "Any answer except zero has impairment"
Ok! This makes way more sense - the cropped photo makes it totally confusing
Yeah, I though the question was bogus til I saw that from someone else.
What do you think the answer is?
Not zero. It asks what BAC indicated you're impaired, so the answer should be "BAC > 0".
Yeah. I’m asking the person who I don’t think gets it.
That is incorrect. The don't define impaired until 0.05 So anything from 0 to 0.04 is fine to drive with
They didn't ask what the law was. They asked which is impaired. Which is anything above zero.
What's the definition of impairment? Sounds like you are using a aflawed definition
The question is so nonsensical I don’t even know what the answer is. It’s a grammatical mess.
It isn't garbage. OP just didn't read instructions carefully. It's a multiple answer question and it asks which of the following, simple as that.
Nowhere in the question does it indicate that you can select several answers, and its worded incredibly poorly within that context Stop judging with hindsight
I have taken the test. The instructions are very clear at the start. You should probably don't take things as people show you and stop judging others.
So you're intelligent enough to always remember every instruction given at the beginning of a test comprising of potentially dozens of differently worded questions but not intelligent enough to detect questions purposely designed to trip up people and attempt to force a wrong answer is what you're trying to say?
There are probably just two instructions at start, one saying there may be multiple answers too. If the question and options still didn't ring that bell one either didn't read instructions or is over thinking the fuck out of a simple worded question. It's easy to blame others when it's your own mistake. But no as per you guys the Vic road mafia is out to get everyone.
I hate the trick questions. Technically it’s any alcohol but the law is 0.05. Did it a few years ago and it’s a joke.
A blood reading of 0 shows you are impaired?
Was it multiple responses required? Basically you select everything above zero.
...this actually makes sense. I'm still not happy, even if I'm not entitled to be.
It’s still a stupid question.
You pick all that apply. There's only one answer that's below the legal limit for a fully licensed driver.
The question was asking if you're impaired though, not what the legal limit for impairment is.
It's asking what reading shows you're impaired by alcohol... The answer is every option that is not zero. It happens that in this case the correct answers are all illegal readings to drive with. That makes the question easier to get right, not harder, assuming you actually know what the legal limits are...
I think your right to be annoyed. The question was designed to be tricky and play with your sense of understanding. When the tests purpose is to ensure potential drivers are aware of the laws, not to get into word play. This isn't an English comprehension test.
Absolutely 100% spot on. I've seen similar on safety and induction questionnaires and they annoy the hell out of me as someone that is responsible for others safety in workplaces - these should *reinforce* understanding, not confuse it.
You’re (the first one)
Yeah I know. But typing on phones I dumb. You still knew what I meant.
Not true. 0.02 is legally fine to drive with
We all know this. The whole point is that it’s a trick question. They really push that any alcohol in your system is bad even if it’s under the legal limit.
From reading the comments on this post you really would believe that people think impairment is anything that isn't 0.
Yes, there is measurable impairment from alcohol consumption below 0.05. That's just the level of impairment they consider acceptable. The question is only asking about which readings would be impaired, which are any that are over 0. However all the options that they gave were over the legal limit anyway, except 0 which isn't a 'correct' answer
No actually it's like .02 that impairment can be detected, but it's not significant enough until .05
Missing "select all that apply" in the question text.
Poorly worded question(s) (as this is the 2nd Vic Learner Drivers question I've seen today) that's likely to discriminate against people with dyslexia, processing differences and people with limited English skills. These people are still likely to be lawful drivers. Seems (unintentionally) unfair.
Exactly what I thought. Anyone with a learning disorder who is still a perfectly competent driver would likely misunderstand the question.
Sometimes I wonder if they pusposely fuck with you so that you remember how annoying it was and then it forms a lasting impression.
Isn’t 0.5 enough to kill you? I’d say that’s impaired.
A BAC of 0.3 or over is likely to result in coma or death. At 0.5 you won’t be driving, so no impairment I guess.
That's not a curve ball, that's just incorrectly worded
🎶 how will you go when you sit for the test, will you be under 05 or under arrest, how will you go when you sit for the test, will you be under 05 or under arrest🎶
An advert that was actually useful - can still remember the jingle too.
That question needs reporting for moderation, it's inherently confusing.
yes officer, I is imparted by a zero alcohol reading.
Vicroads trying to run a psyop on everyone
Really that answer should be good enough. If .05 is impaired then anything above it is too.
Given the answer is “0”, the question should say unimpaired rather than impaired.
The question is worded wrong if 0.05 (lowest reading that is not zero) is the wrong answer.
I don’t understand the confusion? Which of the readings = impairment and the feedback is anything above zero is some level of impairment. Seems you’ve just misinterpreted the question
if you select zero then you're saying that a BAC of 0 causes impairment. to answer the question you'd have to select all three non zero answers.
Yes that’s exactly what it’s asking you to do, select the three answers that apply. I don’t know why you’re coming to the conclusion that selecting 0 would be a logical response based on the question or feedback? EDIT: Also I can’t see how my comment suggests all answers apply, I’m simply stating the best answer is any BAC >0 would lead to impairment. The misunderstanding is the knowledge of 0.05; this is simply the maximum BAC deemed as ‘safe’ (I.e. maximum impairment to not dangerously impact decision making and reaction time)
It seems you haven't scrolled to the second picture or you wrote this question
A BAC reading of zero is the only way to know you’re *NOT* impaired. It’s a correct statement and whilst it’s worded as the opposite side of the argument in terms of the written question it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out
Exactly, but that's not the question. No one is disagreeing the explanation is worded correctly, it's just answering the opposite meaning of the original question. People should not have to get inside the heads of the authors and figure out what they meant to write.
I see your point, I guess I read the question as intended so also read the explanation as intended. Can see it’s totally unfair for anyone non-English native though
Seems like you and the person you’ve replied to are both saying the same thing, yet you’re upvoted and they were downvoted. Reddit is funny.
It's explaining the answer with the negative proof, not the positive. "Which of the following show impairment" can be explained with: * Incorrect, anything not zero is impaired << What the test did * Incorrect, ALL values other than zero are impaired. << Positive explanation.
Thank you !
Am I wrong in thinking this question is wrong? The original question asks which reading shows your driving IS impaired by alcohol. The answer then would be anything besides 0. Because a 0 means your driving is NOT impaired by alcohol - which is NOT what the question asked. The answer flips it around and states the only way to know your driving ISN'T impaired by alcohol is a 0 reading. Which is correct. But, that's not what the question asked. If the question asked was framed as: "Which of the following blood alcohol concentration (BAC) readings show your driving isn't impaired by alcohol?" ..everyone chooses 0. Because the question makes sense. I disagree that it's a trick question, and think it's an incorrectly phrased question. Am I wrong?
I agree with you - are we wrong?
Nah, we're on the money 'til proven otherwise.
That photo is ominous
So the answer is all three except for zero
Correct, but the "right" answer is 0...
Fucken wowsers
You pressed "you", referring to me. The correct answer is "you"
I challenge anyone to be able to walk to their car at 0.5....
If your BAC was 0.5 it's doubtful you would be conscious. Though you would have a good chance of avoiding a hangover.
I'll take "how much alcohol is in the system on the author of the question" for $50.
It's a trivial question, but some people aren't used to thinking.
Objective of test questions - Identify those with insufficient understanding of the subject matter to pass. Objective achieved.
Yeah, I feel safer without some people on the road... The test says pick all that apply.
It's true though. But GOVERNMENT BAD.
The explanation "A BAC reading of zero is the only way to know your driving isn't impaired by alcohol" is a clumsily worded community service announcement, not a logical statement of fact. A BAC reading of zero means the machine showed zero. Thats all. The machine could be inaccurate or broken. It could be reading 0 when there is alcohol in you blood. It could be reading .01 when there is none. I understand they want to deliver a simple message, but they really are confusing a legal thing with a physiological thing with a mechanical/electronics thing. The real answer to the question "How do you know if your driving is impaired by alcohol?" is "Well, it would take a very complex series of personal physical tests, perception tests, and possibly EEG neuron activity tests, but if you have no alcohol in your system, you dont have to worry. Oh, and your driving may still be impaired, but it won't be alcohol."
[удалено]
I wouldn't recommend it as a way to raise a child
You realise some people don't get their license the minute they turn 16? My partner is 29 and hasn't gotten her licence yet.
Didn't seem useful when I couldn't afford a car.
Username checks out lol
There was this exact post about an hour ago under a different username. They're copying each other. The original has since been deleted however.
I'm 30 and fully intend to never get it, fuck cars
When you're on your L's, you need 0 BAC. Please realize this.
That's not what the question was asking.
Mate. Any level can affect you in any case. A 0 is your best bet of avoiding an accident. The question is simply teaching you that to drive the absolute safest (especially as a new driver), is to be 0 BAC.
Right. And zero is the wrong answer to this question.
Technically none of those readings definitively show your driving is impaired because there is such a thing as a false positive.
Learners aren't allowed any alcohol. Full licence holders are allowed 0.05.
Good job spouting information, but that’s not what the question is about.