MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061286928 · doi:10.1080/10508414.2012.689208

Cognitive-Adaptation Training for Improving Performance and Stress Management of Air Force Pilots

2012· article· en· W2061286928 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Aviation Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsGDG Environnement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodAdaptation (eye)AnxietyCognitionStress managementPsychologyEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceApplied psychologyStress (linguistics)Clinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study investigated the effects of cognitive-adaptation training on flight performance and stress management in a sample of pilot cadets who were undergoing a basic flying program (N = 21). The aim of the training was to enhance the participants' awareness of the cognitive processes that they used in a given situation, and to strengthen reflective processes. Cadets were assigned to a training group or to a control group. In-flight performance, stress-management mode, anxiety, and mood were measured. A significant pre- to posttraining improvement in in-flight performance was observed for the lowest ranked cadets in the training group. Anxiety and mood scores did not differ significantly between the training and control groups. However, trained cadets reported changing their stress-management mode. On the whole, these results indicate that cognitive-adaptation training of the type used in this study can enhance both cognitive and emotional adaptation skills.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.304 · 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