ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022
Retrospective behavioral sampling (RBS): A method to effectively track the cognitive fluctuations driven by naturalistic stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Free Will as Defined by the Constrained Disorder Principle: a Restricted, Mandatory, Personalized, Regulated Process for Decision-Making.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Everyday experiences are dynamic, driving fluctuations across simultaneous cognitive processes. A key challenge in the study of naturalistic cognition is to disentangle the complexity of these dynamic processes, without altering the natural experience itself. Retrospective behavioral sampling (RBS) is a novel approach to model the cognitive fluctuations corresponding to the time-course of naturalistic stimulation, across a variety of cognitive dimensions. We tested the effectiveness and reliability of RBS in a web-based experiment, in which 53 participants viewed short movies and listened to a story, followed by retrospective reporting. Participants recalled their experience of 55 discrete events from the stimuli, rating their quality of memory, magnitude of surprise, intensity of negative and positive emotions, perceived importance, reflectivity state, and mental time travel. In addition, a subset of the original cohort re-rated their memory of events in a follow-up questionnaire. Results show highly replicable fluctuation patterns across distinct cognitive dimensions, thereby revealing a stimulus-driven experience that is substantially shared among individuals. Remarkably, memory ratings more than a week after stimulation resulted in an almost identical time-course of memorability as measured immediately following stimulation. In addition, idiosyncratic response patterns were preserved across different stimuli, indicating that RBS characterizes individual differences that are stimulus invariant. The current findings highlight the potential of RBS as a powerful tool for measuring dynamic processes of naturalistic cognition. We discuss the promising approach of matching RBS fluctuations with dynamic processes measured via other testing modalities, such as neuroimaging, to study the neural manifestations of naturalistic cognitive processing.
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.