Literature DB >> 33954913

Cognitive test scores vary with choice of personal digital device.

Eliza Passell1, Roger W Strong2,3, Lauren A Rutter4, Heesu Kim2,5, Luke Scheuer2, Paolo Martini6, Liz Grinspoon2, Laura Germine2,3,6.   

Abstract

Mobile- and web-based psychological research are a valuable addition to the set of tools available for scientific study, reducing logistical barriers for research participation and allowing the recruitment of larger and more diverse participant groups. However, this comes at the cost of reduced control over the technology used by participants, which can introduce new sources of variability into study results. In this study, we examined differences in measured performance on timed and untimed cognitive tests between users of common digital devices in 59,587 (Study 1) and 3818 (Study 2) visitors to TestMyBrain.org , a web-based cognitive testing platform. Controlling for age, gender, educational background, and cognitive performance on an untimed vocabulary test, users of mobile devices, particularly Android smartphones, showed significantly slower performance on tests of reaction time than users of laptop and desktop computers, suggesting that differences in device latency affect measured reaction times. Users of devices that differ in user interface (e.g. screen size, mouse vs. touchscreen) also show significant differences (p < 0.001) in measured performance on tests requiring fast reactions or fine motor movements. By quantifying the contribution of device differences to measured cognitive performance in an online setting, we hope to improve the accuracy of mobile- and web-based cognitive assessments, allowing these methods to be used more effectively.
© 2021. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive; Device; Digital; Reaction time; Web-based

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33954913      PMCID: PMC8568735          DOI: 10.3758/s13428-021-01597-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods        ISSN: 1554-351X


  13 in total

1.  Speed and memory in the WAIS-III Digit Symbol--Coding subtest across the adult lifespan.

Authors:  Stephen Joy; Edith Kaplan; Deborah Fein
Journal:  Arch Clin Neuropsychol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.813

2.  Psychological research online: report of Board of Scientific Affairs' Advisory Group on the Conduct of Research on the Internet.

Authors:  Robert Kraut; Judith Olson; Mahzarin Banaji; Amy Bruckman; Jeffrey Cohen; Mick Couper
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  2004 Feb-Mar

3.  Does variability in human performance outweigh imprecision in response devices such as computer keyboards?

Authors:  Markus F Damian
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2010-02

4.  Administration and interpretation of the Trail Making Test.

Authors:  Christopher R Bowie; Philip D Harvey
Journal:  Nat Protoc       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 13.491

5.  Reaction time and variability 5 and 10 years after traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  C R Hetherington; D T Stuss; M A Finlayson
Journal:  Brain Inj       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 2.311

Review 6.  Internet research in psychology.

Authors:  Samuel D Gosling; Winter Mason
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 24.137

7.  Social anhedonia is associated with neural abnormalities during face emotion processing.

Authors:  Laura T Germine; Lucia Garrido; Lori Bruce; Christine Hooker
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  When does cognitive functioning peak? The asynchronous rise and fall of different cognitive abilities across the life span.

Authors:  Joshua K Hartshorne; Laura T Germine
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2015-03-13

9.  Reaction times and performance variability in normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Ellen Gorus; Rudi De Raedt; Margareta Lambert; Jean-Claude Lemper; Tony Mets
Journal:  J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.680

10.  Age and sex differences in reaction time in adulthood: results from the United Kingdom Health and Lifestyle Survey.

Authors:  Geoff Der; Ian J Deary
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2006-03
View more
  3 in total

1.  Can we measure individual differences in cognitive measures reliably via smartphones? A comparison of the flanker effect across device types and samples.

Authors:  Thomas Pronk; Rebecca J Hirst; Reinout W Wiers; Jaap M J Murre
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-06-16

2.  Bridging the Technological Divide: Stigmas and Challenges With Technology in Digital Brain Health Studies of Older Adults.

Authors:  Jessica Nicosia; Andrew J Aschenbrenner; Sarah L Adams; Marisol Tahan; Sarah H Stout; Hannah Wilks; Joyce E Balls-Berry; John C Morris; Jason Hassenstab
Journal:  Front Digit Health       Date:  2022-04-29

3.  Self-administered Web-Based Tests of Executive Functioning and Perceptual Speed: Measurement Development Study With a Large Probability-Based Survey Panel.

Authors:  Ying Liu; Stefan Schneider; Bart Orriens; Erik Meijer; Jill E Darling; Tania Gutsche; Margaret Gatz
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 7.076

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.