Trail Making Test, Part B as a Measure of Executive Control: Validation Using a Set-Switching Paradigm
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Bench or experimentalConsensus signal: Bench or experimental
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.233
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.612
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Recent controversy surrounds the use of the Trail Making Test as a measure of cognitive flexibility, given that the Trail Making Test, Part B (TMT-B) also differs from Part A (TMT-A) in factors of motor control and perceptual complexity. The present study compared performance in the TMT and a set-switching task in order to test the assumption that cognitive flexibility is captured in TMT-B performance. Set-switching tasks have low motor and perceptual selection demands, and therefore provide a clearer index of executive function. In this study, participants made category judgments for digits, letters, or symbols across a series of trials, and performance for consecutive same-task trials was compared with task-switch trials. Results of the set-switching task indicated significant switch cost, but only for the situation of task alternation (e.g., an ABA series), suggesting that task-set inhibition may play a role in this effect. Alternating-switch cost was significantly correlated with TMT-B performance, especially with the TMT-B to TMT-A ratio (B/A). Cost for alternating switches was especially large for participants with B/A ratio > 3. These results provide direct evidence that the B/A ratio of performance in the TMT provides an index of executive function.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology
- Topic
- Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Field
- Neuroscience
- Canadian institutions
- University of Regina
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Cognitive flexibilityTask switchingPsychologyTrail Making TestTask (project management)Set (abstract data type)CognitionFlexibility (engineering)Cognitive psychologyExecutive functionsPerceptionAudiologyComputer scienceStatisticsNeuroscienceNeuropsychologyMedicine
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes