Rethinking planning metrics: An analysis of common measurements of planning abilities

IF 2.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Emma G. Cunningham , Daphné Bavelier , C. Shawn Green
{"title":"Rethinking planning metrics: An analysis of common measurements of planning abilities","authors":"Emma G. Cunningham ,&nbsp;Daphné Bavelier ,&nbsp;C. Shawn Green","doi":"10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106220","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Planning, or the ability to simulate and execute a sequence of steps toward a goal, is integral for success in a range of activities, from cooking a meal to developing a new software program. Indeed, robust planning abilities have been found to predict success in math for children and the maintenance of independence in older adults. Due to the significant real-world impact of developing and sustaining strong planning abilities over the lifetime, bolstering these skills through training could prove highly beneficial for a host of life outcomes. However, it remains unclear whether the measurement tasks currently used to assess planning abilities are addressing a consistent and cohesive cognitive construct. Although planning researchers have identified tasks they believe tap planning skills, these tasks have not been subjected to individual differences testing to assess the relationship between them. Therefore, the present study investigated the associations between three tasks used to measure planning in psychology and adjacent fields (the Tower of London task, the Zoo Map test, and the Traveling Salesperson Problems) in two samples; an original study and in a pre-registered replication. Contrary to their characterization as tasks designed to measure a skill under a common semantic label, the correlations between planning tasks found in this study were negligible and unstable between samples. The lack of reliable associations between tasks indicates that they are very likely not measuring the same underlying skill, and thus, should be viewed with caution when used to measure planning individually.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48455,"journal":{"name":"Cognition","volume":"263 ","pages":"Article 106220"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001002772500160X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Planning, or the ability to simulate and execute a sequence of steps toward a goal, is integral for success in a range of activities, from cooking a meal to developing a new software program. Indeed, robust planning abilities have been found to predict success in math for children and the maintenance of independence in older adults. Due to the significant real-world impact of developing and sustaining strong planning abilities over the lifetime, bolstering these skills through training could prove highly beneficial for a host of life outcomes. However, it remains unclear whether the measurement tasks currently used to assess planning abilities are addressing a consistent and cohesive cognitive construct. Although planning researchers have identified tasks they believe tap planning skills, these tasks have not been subjected to individual differences testing to assess the relationship between them. Therefore, the present study investigated the associations between three tasks used to measure planning in psychology and adjacent fields (the Tower of London task, the Zoo Map test, and the Traveling Salesperson Problems) in two samples; an original study and in a pre-registered replication. Contrary to their characterization as tasks designed to measure a skill under a common semantic label, the correlations between planning tasks found in this study were negligible and unstable between samples. The lack of reliable associations between tasks indicates that they are very likely not measuring the same underlying skill, and thus, should be viewed with caution when used to measure planning individually.
重新思考规划度量:对规划能力的常用度量的分析
计划,或者说模拟和执行实现目标的一系列步骤的能力,是一系列活动成功的必要条件,从做饭到开发一个新的软件程序。事实上,人们发现,强大的计划能力预示着儿童在数学上的成功,以及老年人保持独立性的能力。由于在一生中发展和维持强大的计划能力对现实世界的影响很大,通过培训增强这些技能可能对许多生活结果非常有益。然而,目前尚不清楚的是,用于评估计划能力的测量任务是否解决了一致和有凝聚力的认知结构。尽管规划研究人员已经确定了他们认为需要规划技能的任务,但这些任务还没有经过个体差异测试来评估它们之间的关系。因此,本研究在两个样本中调查了用于测量心理学和邻近领域规划的三个任务(伦敦塔任务、动物园地图测试和旅行推销员问题)之间的关联;一项原始研究,并在预先注册的复制中。与它们的特征相反,它们被设计为在一个共同的语义标签下测量技能的任务,本研究中发现的计划任务之间的相关性可以忽略不计,并且在样本之间不稳定。任务之间缺乏可靠的关联表明它们很可能没有度量相同的潜在技能,因此,在单独度量计划时应该谨慎看待。
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
Cognition
Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
283
期刊介绍: Cognition is an international journal that publishes theoretical and experimental papers on the study of the mind. It covers a wide variety of subjects concerning all the different aspects of cognition, ranging from biological and experimental studies to formal analysis. Contributions from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, mathematics, ethology and philosophy are welcome in this journal provided that they have some bearing on the functioning of the mind. In addition, the journal serves as a forum for discussion of social and political aspects of cognitive science.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信