Question #1. I don't think it's wise to develop a hypothesis without there being a basis for said hypothesis. Then you're just steering the actual data.
LOL, question #2. Before looking at any of the answers, I tried answering on my own (as I often do to pick the answer which best fits my natural reaction), and my first thought was, "Poke the teacher with a pencil." KICKING the teacher is about the closest, since it would be conveying it the same way I would convey it. That is, one cannot deny something is not real on some level if they are witnessing it. You can only confirm your own pain, so...inflicting pain upon them, while a bit violent, would be a bit necessary to convey that idea without a fragment of a doubt.
#3 Very odd question, but I went with the first option, on account of the fact that I answered in my head (note that this is censored to how I usually think) , "Numbers are used to count stuff. They're what we used to keep track of how many things there are." And that first answer seemed to be the most simplistic one.
#4 Not quite sure how to interpret that one, but I went with the first answer because I had a bone to pick with all of them; the second answer seemed a bit too scientific for how I tend to approach "morality", and the third answer seemed fallacious (begging the question, basically, merely "having a direct effect" for the sake of its own morality seems a bit shaky to me), and the fourth one actually strikes me as the beginning steps to becoming a true sociopath. So I went with the first one, since it seems like an obvious statement.
#5 Went with the first statement. Second statement; what the #@$*...? Why would just having the book, in ANY way be enough? Why pursue ANY knowledge without the intent of SOME sort of application? Third one, I'd imagine just blundering in would lead to a lot of losses, hence why I would want to study up a bit first to have some idea of what I'm doing ahead of time (because while I'm practical, I still am quite capable of foreseeing potential losses and correcting my present behavior to avoid them). Fourth answer seems a bit like a copout; under normal circumstances, I don't see myself as being interested in gardening, but it didn't seem to be a "real" answer to me.
#6 Depends on if I'm familiar with the city or not; I might zone out a little bit in a familiar/safe location. However, in a city, I'm always tense and trying to stay on track to try and keep from getting mugged/stabbed/hit by cars... So I tend to stay on task in a dense environment like that.
Aaaaand the test told me I'm a sensor.
...Makes sense to me! [/rimshot]