Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28386225›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2017

Attentional Filter Training but Not Memory Training Improves Decision-Making.

Marlen Schmicker, Patrick Müller, Melanie Schwefel, Notger G Müller

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03228446 (Improving Cognitive Functions by Training Distractor Inhibition), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03228446 nacompletednot on this map

Improving Cognitive Functions by Training Distractor Inhibition (DIIN) in Younger and Older Healthy Adults

TypeinterventionalSponsorGerman Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)Ran2012 to 2019Enrolled60ConditionsCognitive Decline, Healthy, Age-related Cognitive DeclineArmsfilter training, memory training, no training (control)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marlen SchmickerNeuroprotection Laboratory, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)Magdeburg, Germany; Otto von Guericke UniversityMagdeburg, Germany.
Patrick MüllerNeuroprotection Laboratory, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)Magdeburg, Germany; Otto von Guericke UniversityMagdeburg, Germany.
Melanie SchwefelNeuroprotection Laboratory, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)Magdeburg, Germany; Otto von Guericke UniversityMagdeburg, Germany.
Notger G MüllerNeuroprotection Laboratory, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE)Magdeburg, Germany; Otto von Guericke UniversityMagdeburg, Germany; Center for Behavioral Brain SciencesMagdeburg, Germany.
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases · DECenter for Behavioral Brain Sciences · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Decision-making has a high practical relevance for daily performance. Its relation to other cognitive abilities such as executive control and memory is not fully understood. Here we asked whether training of either attentional filtering or memory storage would influence decision-making as indexed by repetitive assessments of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). The IGT was developed to assess and simulate real-life decision-making (Bechara et al., 2005). In this task, participants gain or lose money by developing advantageous or disadvantageous decision strategies. On five consecutive days we trained 29 healthy young adults (20-30 years) either in working memory (WM) storage or attentional filtering and measured their IGT scores after each training session. During memory training (MT) subjects performed a computerized delayed match-to-sample task where two displays of bars were presented in succession. During filter training (FT) participants had to indicate whether two simultaneously presented displays of bars matched or not. Whereas in MT the relevant target stimuli stood alone, in FT the targets were embedded within irrelevant distractors (bars in a different color). All subjects within each group improved their performance in the trained cognitive task. For the IGT, we observed an increase over time in the amount of money gained in the FT group only. Decision-making seems to be influenced more by training to filter out irrelevant distractors than by training to store items in WM. Selective attention could be responsible for the previously noted relationship between IGT performance and WM and is therefore more important for enhancing efficiency in decision-making.

Indexed as

decision-makingdistractor inhibitionfilter trainingIowa Gambling Taskworking memory

Identifiers

PMID28386225
PMCPMC5362583
OpenAlexW2603446406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.