# Schulte table: how to play, what it trains and how to improve your time Canonical: https://romeoapps.app/en/dual-n-back/schulte-table-guide/ Author: Roméo Gambino · Published: 2026-09-23 · Updated: 2026-09-23 · App: Dual N-Back (https://romeoapps.app/en/dual-n-back/) How to play the classic 5×5 Schulte table, what your time really measures, what the evidence says about speed reading, and practical ways to get faster. ## What a Schulte table is A Schulte table is a grid of randomly placed numbers that you find in order, from the smallest to the largest, as fast as you can. The classic version is a 5×5 grid holding the numbers 1 to 25. It was first developed as a psychodiagnostic test of attention by the German psychiatrist and psychotherapist Walter Schulte, and the two measures that count are the time you take and the number of errors you make. Today it is best known as a speed-reading and focus drill, which is where most of the confusion about it begins. ## How to play, step by step Start with a freshly shuffled grid. Find 1, then 2, then 3, and so on up to 25: on paper you point at each number, on a phone you tap it. The clock starts with your first look at the grid and stops on 25. Always use a new layout for a timed attempt. If you replay the same grid, you are measuring your memory of where the numbers were rather than your search. Write down your time and your errors together, because one without the other says very little. ## The classic rule: eyes on the centre Traditional instructions ask you to fix your gaze on the centre of the grid and find the numbers with your peripheral vision, without moving your eyes. It is a demanding rule. In a 2016 review, Rosenholtz describes peripheral vision as underlying a broad range of visual tasks, visual search included, in spite of its significant loss of information. Keeping your eyes perfectly still is hard, and no phone checks whether you do. Treat the rule as one way of playing, and compare only times played the same way. ## What your time actually measures Finding numbers in order combines several steps: scanning for a target, recognising it, keeping track of which number comes next and moving your finger. Its closest well-studied relative is part A of the Trail Making Test, in which a person connects the numbers 1 to 25 in numerical order. In a 2009 study, Sánchez-Cubillo and colleagues concluded that part A requires mainly visuoperceptual abilities. A Schulte time is best read the same way: visual search and response speed, on that grid, on that device, that day. ## What it does not measure A Schulte time is not an IQ score, a vision test or a diagnosis. Normative data for the Trail Making Test, published by Tombaugh in 2004 from 911 adults, show that performance on that test decreases with increasing age and lower levels of education. Comparing your time with a stranger’s online is therefore far less useful than comparing it with your own earlier times. If you notice a real change in your eyesight, see an optician or a doctor rather than relying on a grid. ## Speed reading claims, checked Schulte tables are often sold as a speed-reading tool, on the idea that seeing more at once lets you read more per glance. A 2016 review of reading research by Rayner and colleagues found a trade-off between speed and accuracy: it is unlikely that readers can double or triple their speed, for example from around 250 to 500–750 words per minute, while understanding the text as well. The authors place language skill at the heart of reading speed, and recommend practising reading and building vocabulary. ## Will the practice carry over? In 2016, Simons and colleagues reviewed the studies cited by brain-training companies. They found extensive evidence that training improves performance on the trained tasks, less evidence for closely related tasks, and little evidence for distantly related tasks or everyday cognitive performance. Expect to get better at Schulte tables with practice. Treat any wider promise, such as better focus at work, faster reading or sharper reflexes in sport, as unproven until a controlled study shows it for this exercise. ## What counts as a good time There are no reliable norms for phone versions of the table. Grids differ in size, spacing, the size of the numbers and how errors are counted, so an “average time” published for one app does not transfer to another. Your first attempts are simply your baseline. The most useful comparison is your own median over a week, played under the same conditions, rather than a single best run on a good day. ## How to search more efficiently Most lost time comes from rescanning the whole grid for a number you cannot see. When a number does not stand out, switch to a fixed scanning pattern, row by row or in a spiral from the centre, instead of darting around. Say the next target silently as you tap the current one. As you get more practised, try glancing for the next number while your finger is still moving. These are strategies for this task, not proof of a broader skill. ## Accuracy first, then speed Speed and accuracy pull against each other. Heitz describes this speed–accuracy trade-off as one of the most ubiquitous effects in the study of decisions. Some digital versions add a time penalty for each wrong tap, so a hurried error can cost more than a careful half-second. Start by aiming for clean runs with no errors, then push the pace once clean runs feel easy. A fast time with several errors is a worse result than a slightly slower one without. ## Keep the conditions the same Times are only comparable when the conditions are. Use the same device, the same grid size and the same rule, eyes fixed on the centre or free to move. Hold the phone at a similar distance and keep the screen brightness similar. Note anything unusual, such as poor sleep, a noisy room or an interruption. A slow run on a tired evening tells you about that evening, not about a lasting change. ## A simple practice routine Short, regular sessions are easier to read than long ones. For example, play three to five grids, write down your best time, your median and your errors, and stop when your times start to climb. Review the week rather than the day: a falling median with few errors is real progress on the task. If a session feels frustrating, stop and come back tomorrow, since fatigue shows up in your times. ## Variations worth trying Once the standard grid feels familiar, variations keep it interesting. Common versions use grids of other sizes, letters instead of numbers, or coloured cells. You can also count down from 25 to 1, which changes the order your eyes expect. Keep each variation in its own column of your log: a time on a letter grid is not comparable with a time on a number grid, and mixing them hides your real progress. ## Where Dual N-Back fits Dual N-Back includes a Schulte table among the short games of its Lab, next to the main n-back exercise. Each game shuffles the numbers 1 to 25 on a 5×5 grid; you tap them in ascending order while a timer runs to the hundredth of a second, and each wrong tap adds a one-second penalty. At the end you see your total time, your average time per number and your errors. Your best time is kept in your records, and your Lab level rises by at most one step per game, based on your time. The instructions suggest keeping your eyes on the centre, but the app cannot check where you look, and its scores describe performance on this task only. ## Questions ### How do you play a Schulte table? Find the numbers 1 to 25 in order on a shuffled 5×5 grid, as fast as you can, and note both your time and your errors. The traditional rule is to keep your eyes on the centre and use peripheral vision. Use a new grid for every timed attempt. ### What is a good Schulte table time? There are no reliable norms for phone versions, because grids, spacing and error rules differ between apps. Compare yourself with your own median over a week, played on the same device with the same rule, rather than with times posted online. ### Does the Schulte table improve reading speed or peripheral vision? Practice reliably makes you faster at the table itself. Reviews of brain training find little evidence that gains carry over to distant skills, and reading research finds a trade-off between reading speed and comprehension, with language skill at the heart of reading speed. ### Should I move my eyes during a Schulte table? The classic rule says no: fix the centre and search with peripheral vision. Keeping your eyes still is hard and nothing checks it, so pick one rule, eyes fixed or free, and compare only times played the same way. ## Further reading - Wikipédia · Table de Schulte — https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_de_Schulte - Wikipedia · Trail Making Test — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_Making_Test - Sánchez-Cubillo et al. (2009), Construct validity of the Trail Making Test: role of task-switching, working memory, inhibition/interference control, and visuomotor abilities, Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society — https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617709090626 - Tombaugh (2004), Trail Making Test A and B: normative data stratified by age and education, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology — https://doi.org/10.1016/S0887-6177(03)00039-8 - Rosenholtz (2016), Capabilities and limitations of peripheral vision, Annual Review of Vision Science — https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-vision-082114-035733 - Rayner, Schotter, Masson, Potter & Treiman (2016), So much to read, so little time: how do we read, and can speed reading help?, Psychological Science in the Public Interest — https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615623267 - Simons et al. (2016), Do “Brain-Training” Programs Work?, Psychological Science in the Public Interest — https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616661983 - Heitz (2014), The speed-accuracy tradeoff: history, physiology, methodology, and behavior, Frontiers in Neuroscience — https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00150 ## About this guide Published by Roméo Apps. Writing and translations are assisted by AI, with technical checks and targeted reviews. The cited sources do not certify the app or its results. [About the publisher](https://romeoapps.app/en/about/)