ArticleBehavior research methods2024
The novel object-matching test (NOM Test): A psychometric measure of visual comparison ability.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Linking social attention to reproductive state and future reproduction in female monkeys.Behavioral ecology and sociobiology · 2026Article
- On the Continuum of Foundational Validity: Lessons from Eyewitness Science for Latent Fingerprint Examination.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Jack of all trades, master of one: domain-specific and domain-general contributions to perceptual expertise in visual comparison.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- Measuring object recognition ability: Reliability, validity, and the aggregate z-score approach.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a new test of object-matching ability: the Novel Object-Matching Test (NOM Test). Object-matching (or visual comparison) is a complex cognitive and perceptual visual comparison task undertaken by forensic scientists - yet no openly available, standardised and psychometrically validated test of object-matching ability exists. This is in contrast to other visual comparison domains like face-matching where many tests are widely available. In this paper, we present the development and psychometric validation of the first openly available object-matching test where people view two complex artificial visual patterns side-by-side and decide if they are from the same source or different sources. We provide normative data and psychometric properties for two long-form and two short-form versions of the test, and two additional versions designed to identify high and low-performers. We also provide evidence of discriminant validity and convergent validity that demonstrates the NOM Test correlates strongly with other object-matching tasks like fingerprint-matching - but not other tasks requiring cognitive-perceptual skill (e.g., visual intelligence). The NOM Test is free for research use with acknowledgment and is available at https://osf.io/pv6ye/ .
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.