ArticlePloS one2021
Comparable performance on a spatial memory task in data collected in the lab and online.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual Reality Gamification of Visual Search, Response Inhibition, and Visual Short-Term Memory Tasks for Cognitive Assessment: Experimental Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Trial
- Expectation-[in]congruence differentially impacts recall and recognition of object features.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Visual Beauty Assessment Scale: Psychometric Validation of Italian and English Versions.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Probabilistic prediction and context tree identification in the Goalkeeper game.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Examining the cognitive processes underlying resumption costs in task-interruption contexts: Decay or inhibition of suspended task goals?Memory & cognition · 2024Article
- Reward conditioning may not have an effect on category-specific memory.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Biases in object location estimation: The role of rotations and translation.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- The effect of visually filled reproductions on the reproduced durations of auditory intervals.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Orienteering experts report more proficient spatial processing and memory across adulthood.PloS one · 2023Article
- The role of memory and perspective shifts in systematic biases during object location estimation.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Online data collection offers a wide range of benefits including access to larger and more diverse populations, together with a reduction in the experiment cycle. Here we compare performance in a spatial memory task, in which participants had to estimate object locations following viewpoint shifts, using data from a controlled lab-based setting and from an unsupervised online sample. We found that the data collected in a conventional laboratory setting and those collected online produced very similar results, although the online data was more variable with standard errors being about 10% larger than those of the data collected in the lab. Overall, our findings suggest that spatial memory studies using static images can be successfully carried out online with unsupervised samples. However, given the higher variability of the online data, it is recommended that the online sample size is increased to achieve similar standard errors to those obtained in the lab. For the current study and data processing procedures, this would require an online sample 25% larger than the lab sample.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.