姿势对注意力的影响。

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Emilie E Caron, Laura R Marusich, Jonathan Z Bakdash, Reynolds J Ballotti, Andrew M Tague, Jonathan S A Carriere, Daniel Smilek, Derek Harter, Shulan Lu, Michael G Reynolds
{"title":"姿势对注意力的影响。","authors":"Emilie E Caron,&nbsp;Laura R Marusich,&nbsp;Jonathan Z Bakdash,&nbsp;Reynolds J Ballotti,&nbsp;Andrew M Tague,&nbsp;Jonathan S A Carriere,&nbsp;Daniel Smilek,&nbsp;Derek Harter,&nbsp;Shulan Lu,&nbsp;Michael G Reynolds","doi":"10.1027/1618-3169/a000567","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> Smith et al. (2019) found standing resulted in better performance than sitting in three different cognitive control paradigms: a Stroop task, a task-switching, and a visual search paradigm. Here, we conducted close replications of the authors' three experiments using larger sample sizes than the original work. Our sample sizes had essentially perfect power to detect the key postural effects reported by Smith et al. The results from our experiments revealed that, in contrast to Smith et al., the postural interactions were quite limited in magnitude in addition to being only a fraction of the size of the original effects. Moreover, our results from Experiment 1 are consistent with two recent replications (Caron et al., 2020; Straub et al., 2022), which reported no meaningful influences of posture on the Stroop effect. In all, the current research provides further converging evidence that postural influences on cognition do not appear to be as robust, as was initially reported in prior work.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10102972/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Influence of Posture on Attention.\",\"authors\":\"Emilie E Caron,&nbsp;Laura R Marusich,&nbsp;Jonathan Z Bakdash,&nbsp;Reynolds J Ballotti,&nbsp;Andrew M Tague,&nbsp;Jonathan S A Carriere,&nbsp;Daniel Smilek,&nbsp;Derek Harter,&nbsp;Shulan Lu,&nbsp;Michael G Reynolds\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/1618-3169/a000567\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b></b> Smith et al. (2019) found standing resulted in better performance than sitting in three different cognitive control paradigms: a Stroop task, a task-switching, and a visual search paradigm. Here, we conducted close replications of the authors' three experiments using larger sample sizes than the original work. Our sample sizes had essentially perfect power to detect the key postural effects reported by Smith et al. The results from our experiments revealed that, in contrast to Smith et al., the postural interactions were quite limited in magnitude in addition to being only a fraction of the size of the original effects. Moreover, our results from Experiment 1 are consistent with two recent replications (Caron et al., 2020; Straub et al., 2022), which reported no meaningful influences of posture on the Stroop effect. In all, the current research provides further converging evidence that postural influences on cognition do not appear to be as robust, as was initially reported in prior work.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10102972/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000567\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000567","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

Smith等人(2019)发现,在三种不同的认知控制范式下,站立比坐着的表现更好:Stroop任务、任务切换和视觉搜索范式。在这里,我们使用比原始作品更大的样本量对作者的三个实验进行了密切的复制。我们的样本量基本上具有完美的能力来检测Smith等人报告的关键姿势效应。我们的实验结果显示,与Smith等人的结果相反,除了仅占原始效应的一小部分外,姿势相互作用的幅度相当有限。此外,实验1的结果与最近的两个重复实验一致(Caron et al., 2020;Straub et al., 2022),报告体态对Stroop效应没有显著影响。总而言之,目前的研究提供了进一步的证据,表明姿势对认知的影响似乎并不像先前工作中最初报道的那样强大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The Influence of Posture on Attention.

The Influence of Posture on Attention.

The Influence of Posture on Attention.

The Influence of Posture on Attention.

Smith et al. (2019) found standing resulted in better performance than sitting in three different cognitive control paradigms: a Stroop task, a task-switching, and a visual search paradigm. Here, we conducted close replications of the authors' three experiments using larger sample sizes than the original work. Our sample sizes had essentially perfect power to detect the key postural effects reported by Smith et al. The results from our experiments revealed that, in contrast to Smith et al., the postural interactions were quite limited in magnitude in addition to being only a fraction of the size of the original effects. Moreover, our results from Experiment 1 are consistent with two recent replications (Caron et al., 2020; Straub et al., 2022), which reported no meaningful influences of posture on the Stroop effect. In all, the current research provides further converging evidence that postural influences on cognition do not appear to be as robust, as was initially reported in prior work.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
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