Updated... just took EK VR 4 this past evening.
EK1: 11
EK2: 11
EK3: 12
EK4: 12
I was just one wrong answer away from a 11 though. I got seven wrong, and they were all from 3 passages: the conflict-resolution one (2) at the beginning, the Rembrandt forgery one (2), and the male-female evolution (3) one at the end. Interesting, especially since I got bookended. So here's a brief self-analysis, for anyone who cares...
1) I thought the conflict-resolution one was just a little dense, and I caught myself glazing over it. A lack of focus probably got me here. Wonder if I can blame that on starting the test right after dinner. A very detail-oriented passage, should have gotten 6/6, no excuses. Going to have to look into whether the PS can affect my VR performance like this, but it wasn't a problem before, especially since VR is my strong suit.
2) The Rembrandt had some interesting trap questions that I missed. Made some not-quite-so-good inferences that ended up getting me a decent answer that wasn't quite right. Have to remember to pick the best answer possible, not just an answer I think is plausible. Its worth noting that I remember at least one of them to be one of those questions with no good answer, requiring you to decide which of the crappy answers is the best one. God, I HATE these, and I identify these as the ones I still get wrong on a consistent basis. This is the type of thing that seems to get me every time I take a VR test.
3) Wow, the male-female evolution one was deceptively hard. The subject matter is very easy to read, but I don't think I properly blocked out the outside influences because I answered two of the questions in a way that I wouldn't have otherwise. Also, the third was one of these questions with no great answers. This passage kicked my ass, and I thought I had nailed this one. This is quite uncharacteristic of me, especially to get 3/6 in one passage.
4) The other ones were relatively simple and I was able to catch the traps and tricks. Even the one where there were like 8-9 questions weren't troublesome. I'm starting to think I need to make an even greater effort to focus 100% the whole way through, especially at the beginning and the end. Now it's time to go back and analyze the thought processes for those questions where there's no one great answer... my only complaint so far about EK is that I almost never agree with the reasoning behind the answers to those particular questions, which invariably go "Using the process of elimination, you should be able to eliminate the other answers and identify this one as the best" which isn't that easy when they all suck. Seems like the author goes out of his way to make some of these convoluted questions. I really need to solve these in a way that I can apply to the actual AAMC verbal passages.