ReviewLearning & behavior2025
Measuring spontaneous episodic future thinking in children: Challenges and opportunities.
Review in Learning & behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The "Spoon task" is a common measure of episodic future thinking (i.e., ability to imagine hypothetical future events) in children. However, by providing items and prompting children to choose one, this task might not require deliberate and goal-driven episodic future thinking. In contrast, "spontaneous" Spoon tasks may better reflect Tulving's original conception as they minimize environmental cues and verbal prompts. We identify challenges in designing such tasks, including removing the scaffolded intention to act and giving children permission and sufficient motivation to act. Drawing on the comparative literature, we propose methods to overcome these obstacles when designing spontaneous Spoon tasks. Furthermore, sampling from the work of Clayton and colleagues, we advocate for a multipronged approach including two or more of the following methods in order to capture spontaneous behavior: naturalistic observation, virtually administered tasks within the child's home, laboratory experiments, and questionnaires. Our review highlights the importance of spontaneous episodic future thinking and establishes a foundation for future methodologies to study this complex cognitive process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39285128What 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.