Naturalistic assessments across the lifespan: Systematic review of inhibition measures in ecological settings

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Larisa-Maria Dina , Tim J. Smith , Tobias U. Hauser , Eleanor J. Dommett
{"title":"Naturalistic assessments across the lifespan: Systematic review of inhibition measures in ecological settings","authors":"Larisa-Maria Dina ,&nbsp;Tim J. Smith ,&nbsp;Tobias U. Hauser ,&nbsp;Eleanor J. Dommett","doi":"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Inhibitory control is essential for our everyday lives. Despite this, it is commonly assessed using non-naturalistic assessments. In this systematic review, we argue for the importance of taking an ecological approach to assess cognition. The aims are to present the state-of-knowledge in naturalistic assessments of inhibitory control, focusing on their methodological characteristics, including psychometric properties and user experience. PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched until September 2024. Studies were included if they used at least one naturalistic method of assessing inhibition. The included studies (N=64) were grouped into three methodological categories: gamification, virtual reality, and brief, repeated assessments in participants’ usual environment in the form of ecological momentary assessments. Sample sizes spanned three orders of magnitude (N=12–22,098). We report considerable heterogeneity in the types of tasks used, and the psychometric details reported. Nonetheless, naturalistic tasks were generally comparable with standardised equivalents, although some tasks assessed mixed-domain constructs. Tasks were feasible and acceptable for participants, with generally high completion rates and engagement. Recommendations for future research are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56105,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","volume":"167 ","pages":"Article 105915"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763424003841","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Inhibitory control is essential for our everyday lives. Despite this, it is commonly assessed using non-naturalistic assessments. In this systematic review, we argue for the importance of taking an ecological approach to assess cognition. The aims are to present the state-of-knowledge in naturalistic assessments of inhibitory control, focusing on their methodological characteristics, including psychometric properties and user experience. PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched until September 2024. Studies were included if they used at least one naturalistic method of assessing inhibition. The included studies (N=64) were grouped into three methodological categories: gamification, virtual reality, and brief, repeated assessments in participants’ usual environment in the form of ecological momentary assessments. Sample sizes spanned three orders of magnitude (N=12–22,098). We report considerable heterogeneity in the types of tasks used, and the psychometric details reported. Nonetheless, naturalistic tasks were generally comparable with standardised equivalents, although some tasks assessed mixed-domain constructs. Tasks were feasible and acceptable for participants, with generally high completion rates and engagement. Recommendations for future research are discussed.
跨越生命周期的自然评估:生态环境中抑制测量的系统回顾
抑制控制对我们的日常生活至关重要。尽管如此,对它的评估通常采用非自然的评估方法。在这篇系统性综述中,我们论证了采用生态学方法评估认知的重要性。目的是介绍抑制控制自然评估的知识现状,重点关注其方法特点,包括心理测量特性和用户体验。对 PubMed、PsycINFO 和 Web of Science 的检索截止到 2024 年 9 月。只要研究使用了至少一种自然主义抑制评估方法,均被纳入研究范围。纳入的研究(N=64)被分为三个方法类别:游戏化、虚拟现实和在参与者的常规环境中以生态瞬间评估的形式进行的简短重复评估。样本量跨越三个数量级(N=12-22,098)。我们报告了所使用的任务类型和所报告的心理测量细节方面存在的相当大的差异。不过,尽管有些任务评估的是混合领域的结构,但自然任务一般都与标准化的等效任务具有可比性。任务对参与者来说是可行和可接受的,完成率和参与度普遍较高。本文讨论了对未来研究的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
466
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the International Behavioral Neuroscience Society publishes original and significant review articles that explore the intersection between neuroscience and the study of psychological processes and behavior. The journal also welcomes articles that primarily focus on psychological processes and behavior, as long as they have relevance to one or more areas of neuroscience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信