ArticleJournal of Intelligence2023
Different Perspectives on Retest Effects in the Context of Spatial Thinking: Interplay of Behavioral Performance, Cognitive Processing, and Cognitive Workload.
Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of International Cognitive Ability Resource (ICAR) Implemented in Mobile Toolbox (MTB).Journal of Intelligence · 2025Article
- Automatic- and Transformer-Based Automatic Item Generation: A Critical Review.Journal of Intelligence · 2025Review
- A 6-week coordinative motor training program improves spatial ability performances in healthy children.Frontiers in cognition · 2024Article
- Consistency of spatial ability performance in children, adolescents, and young adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- A single session of coordinative motor training does not improve spatial ability performances in healthy children.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retest effects refer to performance improvements in a final test by completing previous tests with the same or similar testing materials. Improvements in test-related skills and/or increasing familiarity with the stimulus materials are considered sources of the retest effect. The present study analyzes retest effects in the context of spatial thinking, considering complementing perspectives (behavioral performance, cognitive processing, and cognitive workload). N = 141 participants completed a recently developed ability test for the visualization factor of spatial thinking (R-Cube-Vis Test). This test provides the opportunity to monitor the progression of changes in solving behavior from item to item within each of the six distinct difficulty levels. Items of one difficulty level all require the same spatial solving strategy but vary in visual appearance. Multi-level models were estimated, with items on level 1 and participants on level 2. Results demonstrated retest effects as changes from the beginning to the end of a set of items within each difficulty level by increasing accuracy. Gaze patterns showed the development of solving strategies by participants through, e.g., shifting the focus on relevant item parts. Increasing familiarity with the stimulus materials was indicated in reduced reaction times and increased confidence ratings, but also by the results of a pupillary-based cognitive workload measure. Furthermore, differences between participants with overall high vs. low spatial ability were considered. In addition to a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms of the retest effect, the complementing perspectives provide more detailed information about individual ability profiles for diagnostic purposes.
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.