ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2025
Something's different: elaboration's transferrable role for false alarm reduction.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
False alarming, or detecting an error when there is not one, is a pervasive problem across numerous industries. The present study investigated the role of elaboration, or additional information about non-error differences in complex visual displays, for mitigating false error responding. In Experiment 1, learners studied errors and non-error differences about a virtual LEGO® model. Half of the participants received information about the error (location, omission, orientation) and difference (color, addition) categorization and identification (i.e., what constituted the error or difference). The other half of participants received the same information plus further elaboration about (1) the potential consequences of errors and (2) why differences would not pose potential problems. Receiving additional elaboration about errors and differences aided learners' ability to accurately reject non-error differences at test. Experiment 2 replicated these results with a new stimulus model and extended findings by testing whether receiving elaboration on the first model transferred to support learning in a second, similar model that did not provide elaborations. Our results replicated and extended findings from Experiment 1, such that learners who received elaboration while learning the first model also performed better at correctly rejecting non-error differences at test on the second model. Taken together, our findings provide insight on the transferrable role of feature elaboration to reduce false alarm rates during complex visual display assessments.
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.