Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40405042›Full record

ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2026

The neurocognitive efficiency score: Derivation, validation, and application of a novel combination of concurrent electrophysiological and behavioral data.

Michael J Wenger, James T Townsend, Sarah F Newbolds

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Michael J WengerPsychology, Cellular & Behavioral Neurobiology, The University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA. michael.j.wenger@ou.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5569-3209
James T TownsendPsychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Sarah F NewboldsPsychology, Cellular & Behavioral Neurobiology, The University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA.

Funding

NIEHS NIH HHS 1 K18 ES021624
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perceptual and cognitive effort require the expenditure of brain energy, and the efficiency of that energy expenditure can vary as a function of a range of exogenous and endogenous factors. The same is true for physical work, and tools have been developed to quantify energetic efficiency in the performance of physical work. The same is not true for the study of perceptual and cognitive effort. Here we draw on two lines of research - the formal characterization of workload capacity in perception and cognition, and the study of physical work - to propose a novel measure of neurocognitive efficiency. This neurocognitive efficiency score (NES) combines reaction time data with measures on concurrently acquired electroencephalographic (EEG) data to form a ratio that can be interpreted in terms of work accomplished relative to energy expended. We consider three measures on the EEG and show that one of them - global field power (GFP) - evidences a strong relationship to measures of metabolic energy expended. We then show how the NES can provide insights into differences in perceptual performance as a function of biological state. We argue that the NES has the potential for a wide range of applications in the study of effort exerted in perception and cognition in the context of factors including (but not limited to) aging, disease, stress, and differences in levels of expertise.

Indexed as

BrainCognitionElectroencephalographyPerceptionAdultEnergy MetabolismFemaleHumansMaleNeuropsychological TestsReaction TimeCapacityEEGEfficiencyEffortGlobal field powerHazard functionIron deficiency

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.