Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41684960›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Generation of rule-based matrices with the matRiks package: a tutorial.

Ottavia M Epifania, Andrea Brancaccio, Pasquale Anselmi, Debora de Chiusole

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors.

Ottavia M Epifania *Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento, Rovereto, Italy.
Andrea Brancaccio *Department of Philosophy, Sociology, Education and Applied Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Pasquale AnselmiDepartment of Philosophy, Sociology, Education and Applied Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Debora de ChiusoleDepartment of Philosophy, Sociology, Education and Applied Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Few resources are available for the automatic generation of Raven-like matrices. Some of them are no longer working, while others are hardly customizable without advanced programming skills. Although an R package exists for generating stimuli for psychological assessments, it currently only supports creating rotations of the same shape. The matRiks package has been developed to address the above-mentioned issues. This package generates matrices based on different types of transformation rules. Some rely on visuospatial features, such as shape, size, or orientation. Others are based on logical operations, such as set intersection or union. The package also introduces a key innovation, the automatic generation of distractors based on the common error patterns observed in Raven's tests. This allows for the construction of realistic and diagnostically meaningful response options for each matrix. Overall, the matRiks package provides a flexible and systematic framework for generating well-structured and cognitively interpretable matrix reasoning tasks, based on clearly defined transformation rules. It enables precise control over matrix complexity and supports scalable matrix creation for experimental and assessment purposes. Developed in the R environment, the matRiks package is fully open-source, facilitates the reproducibility of stimuli, and is designed to be easy to use for people with basic knowledge of the R language.

Indexed as

fluid intelligenceopen-sourcereproducibilityR packagerule-based matrices

Identifiers

PMID41684960
PMCPMC12891094

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.