Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39730904›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

A novel scoring protocol reveals age-related differences in abstract compared to concrete thinking in cued autobiographical remembering.

Mariam Hovhannisyan, Quentin Raffaelli, Nadine Chau, Jessica R Andrews-Hanna, Matthew D Grilli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mariam HovhannisyanDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Blvd, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA. mhovhannisyan@arizona.edu.
Quentin RaffaelliDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Blvd, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA.
Nadine ChauDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Blvd, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA.
Jessica R Andrews-HannaDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Blvd, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA. jandrewshanna@arizona.edu.
Matthew D GrilliDepartment of Psychology, University of Arizona, 1503 E University Blvd, Tucson, AZ, 85721, USA. mdgrilli@arizona.edu.

Funding

Tracking autobiographical thoughts: a smartphone-based approach to identifying cognitive correlates of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers and risk factors in clinically normal older adultsR01AG068098 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI Jessica Renee Andrews-Hanna, Matthew D Grilli · 2022 to 2026
$3.5M
Tracking autobiographical thoughts: a smartphone-based approach to the detection of cognitive and neural markers of Alzheimer's disease riskR56AG068098 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI ANDREWS-HANNA, JESSICA RENEE, GRILLI, MATTHEW D · 2020 to 2020
$642k
The episodic autobiographical memory hypothesis of preclinical Alzheimer's disease: Developing a new approach for early cognitive detection and measurement of Alzheimer's diseaseR03AG060271 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI GRILLI, MATTHEW D · 2019 to 2020
$154k
NIA NIH HHS AG068098NIA NIH HHS R01 AG068098NIA NIH HHS R03 AG060271NIA NIH HHS R56 AG068098
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human imagination has garnered growing interest in many fields. However, it remains unclear how to characterize different forms of imaginative thinking and how imagination differs between young and older adults. Here, we introduce a novel scoring protocol based on recent theoretical developments in the cognitive neuroscience of imagination to provide a broad tool with which to characterize imaginative thinking. The scoring protocol distinguishes between concrete/perceptual forms of imagination termed the "mind's eye" and abstract/reflective forms of imagination termed the "mind's mind." The protocol also captures whether thoughts pertain to the self, others, or both. We applied this scoring protocol with high inter-rater reliability across two studies involving distinct participants and narrative-based imagination tasks. When compared to young adults, older adults showed a bias toward general content, which is a feature of the mind's mind form of thinking while describing aloud their memories of specific, past events (Study 1). Further, older adults made fewer references to the self. In a separate study of only older adults (Study 2), increasing age was not associated with a bias toward the mind's mind while describing specific past or future events. These results reveal that imaginative thinking can be characterized within the Mind's Eye Mind's Mind framework, with implications for understanding cognitively normal older age.

Indexed as

ImaginationMemory, EpisodicThinkingAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsAgingCuesFemaleHumansMaleMental RecallMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39730904
PMCPMC11680765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.