MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987114772 · doi:10.1080/13825585.2011.560243

Dissociated deficits of visuo-spatial memory in near space and navigational space: Evidence from brain-damaged patients and healthy older participants

2011· article· en· W1987114772 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Piccardi, Giuseppe Iaria, Filippo Bianchini, Laura Zompanti, Cecilia Guariglia

Bibliographic record

VenueAging Neuropsychology and Cognition · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySpace (punctuation)Cognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyAudiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Defects confined to spatial memory can severely affect a variety of daily life activities, such as remembering the location of objects or navigating the environment, until now the skills involved have been mostly assessed with regard to the visual domain using traditional pencil and paper tests. Our aim was to test the efficacy of a recently developed psychometric instrument (Walking Corsi Test: WalCT) to assess the specific contribution of spatial memory to the complex task of retrieving route knowledge. The WalCT is a 3 × 2.5-m version of the well-known Corsi Block-tapping Test (CBT), in which patients are required to memorize (and replicate) a sequence of body displacements. We assessed the ability of left and right brain-damaged patients, as well as healthy young and senior controls, to perform both the CBT and the WalCT. Results showed differences related to age in the healthy individuals and specific functional dissociations in the brain-damaged patients. The double dissociations found in this study demonstrate the importance of having a task able to detect navigational disorders, because virtual reality tasks are often much too difficult for aged brain-damaged patients to perform.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging Neuropsychology and CognitionSame topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207