Cognitive processes in the Breakfast Task: Planning and monitoring.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Breakfast Task (Craik & Bialystok, 2006) is a computerized task that simulates the planning and monitoring requirements involved in cooking breakfast, an everyday activity important for functional independence. In Experiment 1, 28 adults performed the Breakfast Task, and outcome measures were examined with principal component analysis to elucidate the structure of cognitive processes underlying performance. Analyses revealed a 2-component structure which putatively captured global planning and local monitoring abilities. In Experiment 2, the structure of Breakfast Task performance was cross-validated on a new sample of 59 healthy older adults who also performed tests assessing working memory, processing speed, inhibition, reasoning and prospective memory. Factor analyses showed that the global planning component from the Breakfast Task was significantly correlated with individual differences in executive functions but the local monitoring component was independent of such functions. The Breakfast Task provides a fast, enjoyable, and lifelike assessment of complex everyday planning and monitoring, and their underlying processes such as working memory and executive functions.
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 imitationNot 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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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