Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31869709›Full record

ArticleCognition2020

Do questionnaires reflect their purported cognitive functions?

Ian A Clark, Eleanor A Maguire

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Subjective memory measures: Metamemory questionnaires currently in use.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Effects of Aging on Successful Object Encoding: Enhanced Semantic Representations Compensate for Impaired Visual Representations.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Aesthetic experience enhances first-person spatial representation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ian A ClarkWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, WC1N 3AR, UK.
Eleanor A MaguireWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, WC1N 3AR, UK. Electronic address: e.maguire@ucl.ac.uk.
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 101759/Z/13/ZWellcome Trust 203147/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Questionnaires are used widely across psychology and permit valuable insights into a person's thoughts and beliefs, which are difficult to derive from task performance measures alone. Given their importance and widespread use, it is vital that questionnaires map onto the cognitive functions they purport to reflect. However, where performance on naturalistic tasks such as imagination, autobiographical memory, future thinking and navigation is concerned, there is a dearth of knowledge about the relationships between task performance and questionnaire measures. Questionnaires are also typically designed to probe a specific aspect of cognition, when instead researchers sometimes want to obtain a broad profile of a participant. To the best of our knowledge, no questionnaire exists that asks simple single questions about a wide range of cognitive functions. To address these gaps in the literature, we recruited a large sample of participants (n=217), all of whom completed a battery of widely used questionnaires and performed naturalistic tasks involving imagination, autobiographical memory, future thinking and navigation. We also devised a questionnaire that comprised simple single questions about the cognitive functions of interest. There were four main findings. First, imagination and navigation questionnaires reflected performance on their related tasks. Second, memory questionnaires were associated with autobiographical memory vividness and not internal (episodic) details. Third, imagery questionnaires were more associated with autobiographical memory vividness and future thinking than the questionnaires purporting to reflect these functions. Finally, initial exploratory analyses suggested that a broad profile of information can be obtained efficiently using a small number of simple single questions, and these modelled task performance comparably to established questionnaires in young, healthy adults. Overall, while some questionnaires can act as proxies for behaviour, the relationships between memory and future thinking tasks and questionnaires are more complex and require further elucidation.

Indexed as

Memory, EpisodicAdultFemaleHippocampusHumansImaginationMaleNeuropsychological TestsPsychometricsSpatial NavigationYoung AdultAutobiographical memoryHippocampusImaginationNavigationQuestionnairesScene construction

Identifiers

PMID31869709
PMCPMC6963768
OpenAlexW2996599522

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.