ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Assessing cognitive flexibility in humans and rhesus macaques with visual motion and neutral distractors.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Touchscreen-Based, Multiple-Choice Approach to Cognitive Enrichment of Captive Rhesus Macaques (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cognitive flexibility is the ability of an individual to make behavioral adjustments in response to internal and/or external changes. While it has been reported in a wide variety of species, established paradigms to assess cognitive flexibility vary between humans and non-human animals, making systematic comparisons difficult to interpret. Methods: We developed a computer-based paradigm to assess cognitive flexibility in humans and non-human primates. Our paradigm (1) uses a classical reversal learning structure in combination with a set-shifting approach (4 stimuli and 3 rules) to assess flexibility at various levels; (2) it employs the use of motion as one of three possible contextual rules; (3) it comprises elements that allow a foraging-like and random interaction, i.e., instances where the animals operate the task without following a strategy, to potentially minimize frustration in favor of a more positive engagement. Results and Discussion: We show that motion can be used as a feature dimension (in addition to commonly used shape and color) to assess cognitive flexibility. Due to the way motion is processed in the primate brain, we argue that this dimension is an ideal candidate in situations where a non-binary rule set is needed and where participants might not be able to fully grasp other visual information of the stimulus (e.g., quantity in Wisconsin Card Sorting Test). All participants in our experiment flexibly shifted to and from motion-based rules as well as color- and shape-based rules, but did so with different proficiencies. Overall, we believe that with such approach it is possible to better characterize the evolution of cognitive flexibility in primates, as well as to develop more efficient tools to diagnose and treat various executive function deficits.
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.