MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084100583 · doi:10.1037/0882-7974.21.4.826

Attentional disregulation: A benefit for implicit memory.

2006· article· en· W2084100583 on OpenAlexaff
Gillian Rowe, Steven Valderrama, Lynn Hasher, Agatha Lenartowicz

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Aging · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsPsychologyFrithDistractionTask (project management)CognitionImplicit memoryCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyYoung adultExplicit memoryMemoriaEpisodic memoryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors investigated the effect of age and time of testing on the ability to control attention and addressed the possibility that older adults' susceptibility to distraction may sometimes facilitate performance on a later cognitive task. Using a modification of a G. Rees, C. Russell, C. D. Frith, and J. Driver (1999) procedure, the authors asked the participants to make same or different judgments on line drawings superimposed with task-irrelevant letter strings. Memory for the distractors was subsequently tested with an implicit memory task. Both older and young adults demonstrated greater memory for distractors at nonoptimal times of day than at optimal times of day; however, older adults showed considerably better memory for the distractors than did young adults.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations160
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and AgingSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207