Is Cognitive Flexibility Equivalent to Shifting? Investigating Cognitive Flexibility in Multiple Domains.

Q1 Psychology Journal of Cognition Pub Date : 2024-10-10 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.5334/joc.403
Thea Ionescu, Robert L Goldstone, Doris Rogobete, Mihaela Taranu
{"title":"Is Cognitive Flexibility Equivalent to Shifting? Investigating Cognitive Flexibility in Multiple Domains.","authors":"Thea Ionescu, Robert L Goldstone, Doris Rogobete, Mihaela Taranu","doi":"10.5334/joc.403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the present exploratory study we investigate whether cognitive flexibility is a unitary mechanism underlying flexible behaviours across many domains or a domain-specific capacity. The literature on cognitive flexibility is divided into several research lines that do not converge. The most prominent one considers flexibility an executive function that represents the ability to switch among rules or tasks. In other research traditions it is associated with distinct components, such as the capacity to place an item into many categories (in creativity tests) or a characteristic of different cognitive or perceptual processes (e.g., flexible language use, flexibility in mathematics, perceptual flexibility). To determine whether flexibility in different domains relies on a general shared mechanism, 221 subjects from two countries (The United States and Romania, mean age 19.52 years) were tested online with several measurements from four different domains of investigation: language, mathematics, perception, and executive functions (specifically, set shifting). All tasks required some form of cognitive flexibility. In addition, we measured math anxiety to see how this relates to mathematical flexibility. The results show very few and small significant partial correlations among the tasks. They also highlight that there is no unitary overarching \"executive\" factor. The most prominent common factor was speed of processing for mathematical and language response times. Shifting does not seem to be a mechanism that underlies flexibility in all the investigated domains. While we acknowledge the need for replication of this study, the data suggest that the construct of shifting does not exhaust the notion of flexibility as it arises across cognitive domains.</p>","PeriodicalId":32728,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognition","volume":"7 1","pages":"73"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11468232/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the present exploratory study we investigate whether cognitive flexibility is a unitary mechanism underlying flexible behaviours across many domains or a domain-specific capacity. The literature on cognitive flexibility is divided into several research lines that do not converge. The most prominent one considers flexibility an executive function that represents the ability to switch among rules or tasks. In other research traditions it is associated with distinct components, such as the capacity to place an item into many categories (in creativity tests) or a characteristic of different cognitive or perceptual processes (e.g., flexible language use, flexibility in mathematics, perceptual flexibility). To determine whether flexibility in different domains relies on a general shared mechanism, 221 subjects from two countries (The United States and Romania, mean age 19.52 years) were tested online with several measurements from four different domains of investigation: language, mathematics, perception, and executive functions (specifically, set shifting). All tasks required some form of cognitive flexibility. In addition, we measured math anxiety to see how this relates to mathematical flexibility. The results show very few and small significant partial correlations among the tasks. They also highlight that there is no unitary overarching "executive" factor. The most prominent common factor was speed of processing for mathematical and language response times. Shifting does not seem to be a mechanism that underlies flexibility in all the investigated domains. While we acknowledge the need for replication of this study, the data suggest that the construct of shifting does not exhaust the notion of flexibility as it arises across cognitive domains.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
认知灵活性等同于转移吗?调查多个领域的认知灵活性。
在本探索性研究中,我们将研究认知灵活性是一种跨领域灵活行为的统一机制,还是一种特定领域的能力。关于认知灵活性的文献分为几条研究路线,但并不一致。最著名的一种研究认为,灵活性是一种执行功能,代表了在规则或任务之间切换的能力。在其他研究传统中,灵活性与不同的组成部分相关联,如将一个项目归入多个类别的能力(在创造力测试中)或不同认知或知觉过程的特征(如灵活使用语言、数学灵活性、知觉灵活性)。为了确定不同领域的灵活性是否依赖于一种普遍共享的机制,我们对来自两个国家(美国和罗马尼亚,平均年龄 19.52 岁)的 221 名受试者进行了在线测试,测试内容涉及四个不同的调查领域:语言、数学、知觉和执行功能(特别是集合转换)。所有任务都需要某种形式的认知灵活性。此外,我们还测量了数学焦虑,以了解数学焦虑与数学灵活性之间的关系。结果表明,这些任务之间的部分相关性很小。这些结果还突出表明,并不存在一个统一的 "执行 "因素。最突出的共同因素是数学和语言反应时间的处理速度。转移似乎并不是所有研究领域中灵活性的基础机制。虽然我们承认有必要重复这项研究,但这些数据表明,移位这一概念并没有穷尽灵活性的概念,因为灵活性是跨认知领域的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cognition
Journal of Cognition Psychology-Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Long-term Contingency Learning Depends on Contingency Awareness. I am Once Again Asking for Your Attention: A Replication of Feature-Based Attention Modulations of Binding Effects with Picture Stimuli. Implicit Learning of Parity and Magnitude Associations with Number Color. Exploring Inhibitory Control Processes in Highly Superior Autobiographical Memory (HSAM): A Single Case Study. Readiness for Perception and Action: Towards a More Mechanistic Understanding of Phasic Alertness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1