Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30069031›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2018

The Discrimination Ratio derived from Novel Object Recognition tasks as a Measure of Recognition Memory Sensitivity, not Bias.

Magali H Sivakumaran, Andrew K Mackenzie, Imogen R Callan, James A Ainge, Akira R O'Connor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Magali H SivakumaranUniversity of St Andrews, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, St Andrews, KY16 8JP, United Kingdom.
Andrew K MackenzieNottingham Trent University, School of Social Sciences, Nottingham, NG1 4FQ, United Kingdom.
Imogen R CallanUniversity of St Andrews, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, St Andrews, KY16 8JP, United Kingdom.
James A AingeUniversity of St Andrews, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, St Andrews, KY16 8JP, United Kingdom. jaa7@st-andrews.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-0007-1533
Akira R O'ConnorUniversity of St Andrews, School of Psychology and Neuroscience, St Andrews, KY16 8JP, United Kingdom. aro2@st-andrews.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7943-5183

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) BB/J01446X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Translational recognition memory research makes frequent use of the Novel Object Recognition (NOR) paradigm in which animals are simultaneously presented with one new and one old object. The preferential exploration of the new as compared to the old object produces a metric, the Discrimination Ratio (DR), assumed to represent recognition memory sensitivity. Human recognition memory studies typically assess performance using signal detection theory derived measures; sensitivity (d') and bias (c). How DR relates to d' and c and whether they measure the same underlying cognitive mechanism is, however, unknown. We investigated the correspondence between DR (eye-tracking-determined), d' and c in a sample of 37 humans. We used dwell times during a visual paired comparison task (analogous to the NOR) to determine DR, and a separate single item recognition task to derive estimates of response sensitivity and bias. DR was found to be significantly positively correlated to sensitivity but not bias. Our findings confirm that DR corresponds to d', the primary measure of recognition memory sensitivity in humans, and appears not to reflect bias. These findings are the first of their kind to suggest that animal researchers should be confident in interpreting the DR as an analogue of recognition memory sensitivity.

Indexed as

Psychological TestsRecognition, PsychologyAdolescentAdultEye Movement MeasurementsFemaleHumansMaleSensitivity and SpecificityYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30069031
PMCPMC6070491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.