Exploring working memory across aging using virtual reality
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
Abstract This study aimed to validate a virtual reality (VR) version of a working memory (WM) task. Validating this VR version of the WM task required replicating findings from traditional WM tasks. Nineteen younger adults and twenty older adults completed a delayed match-to-sample WM task in a VR headset. Participants were told to select the shapes that matched the ones previously presented. These shapes varied in number (WM load), with half of them being easily nameable (e.g., heart, Easy condition) or being more abstract (Difficult condition). The accuracy of responding decreased with increasing WM load and was lower for Difficult than Easy conditions when the shape could not be easily named. Additionally, a greater WM load effect was observed in older than younger adults, aligning with findings from non-VR WM research. These results show that VR is a suitable tool for cognitive research, providing new opportunities for more immersive and interactive cognitive assessments.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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