在基因信息样本中,在不同背景下评估的执行功能之间的相关性。

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Journal of Experimental Psychology: General Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-04 DOI:10.1037/xge0001471
Samantha M Freis, Jordan D Alexander, Jacob E Anderson, Robin P Corley, Alejandro I De La Vega, Daniel E Gustavson, Scott I Vrieze, Naomi P Friedman
{"title":"在基因信息样本中,在不同背景下评估的执行功能之间的相关性。","authors":"Samantha M Freis, Jordan D Alexander, Jacob E Anderson, Robin P Corley, Alejandro I De La Vega, Daniel E Gustavson, Scott I Vrieze, Naomi P Friedman","doi":"10.1037/xge0001471","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Executive functions (EFs) are cognitive functions that help direct goal-related behavior. EFs are usually measured via behavioral tasks assessed in highly controlled laboratory settings under the supervision of a research assistant. Online versions of EF tasks are an increasingly popular alternative to in-lab testing. However, researchers do not have the same control over the testing environment during online EF assessments. To assess the extent to which EFs assessed in-lab and online are related, we used data from the Colorado Online Twin Study (CoTwins; 887 individual twins aged 13.98-19.05) and constructed an Lab Common EF factor and an Online Common EF factor from four EF tasks assessed in-lab and online. The Lab Common and Online Common EF factors were genetically identical (<i>r</i>A = 1.00) but phenotypically separable (<i>r</i> = .77, 95% confidence interval [0.59, 0.94]) indicating that these EF factors have the same genetic underpinnings but may be differentially influenced by environmental factors. We examined phenotypic, genetic, and environmental correlations between the EF factors and a general cognitive ability factor (g) assessed in the lab and found similar relationships between Lab Common EF and g and Online Common EF and g. Overall, these results suggest that Common EF factors assessed in different contexts are highly related to each other and similarly related to other cognitive outcomes. These findings indicate that online task-based EF assessments could be a viable strategy for increasing sample sizes in large-scale studies, particularly genetically informed studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":" ","pages":"70-85"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10843656/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Associations between executive functions assessed in different contexts in a genetically informative sample.\",\"authors\":\"Samantha M Freis, Jordan D Alexander, Jacob E Anderson, Robin P Corley, Alejandro I De La Vega, Daniel E Gustavson, Scott I Vrieze, Naomi P Friedman\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xge0001471\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Executive functions (EFs) are cognitive functions that help direct goal-related behavior. EFs are usually measured via behavioral tasks assessed in highly controlled laboratory settings under the supervision of a research assistant. Online versions of EF tasks are an increasingly popular alternative to in-lab testing. However, researchers do not have the same control over the testing environment during online EF assessments. To assess the extent to which EFs assessed in-lab and online are related, we used data from the Colorado Online Twin Study (CoTwins; 887 individual twins aged 13.98-19.05) and constructed an Lab Common EF factor and an Online Common EF factor from four EF tasks assessed in-lab and online. The Lab Common and Online Common EF factors were genetically identical (<i>r</i>A = 1.00) but phenotypically separable (<i>r</i> = .77, 95% confidence interval [0.59, 0.94]) indicating that these EF factors have the same genetic underpinnings but may be differentially influenced by environmental factors. We examined phenotypic, genetic, and environmental correlations between the EF factors and a general cognitive ability factor (g) assessed in the lab and found similar relationships between Lab Common EF and g and Online Common EF and g. Overall, these results suggest that Common EF factors assessed in different contexts are highly related to each other and similarly related to other cognitive outcomes. These findings indicate that online task-based EF assessments could be a viable strategy for increasing sample sizes in large-scale studies, particularly genetically informed studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"70-85\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10843656/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001471\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001471","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

执行功能是帮助指导目标相关行为的认知功能。EF通常是在研究助理的监督下,通过在高度受控的实验室环境中评估的行为任务来测量的。EF任务的在线版本是实验室测试的一种越来越流行的替代方案。然而,在在线EF评估过程中,研究人员对测试环境没有同样的控制权。为了评估实验室和在线评估的EF之间的相关性,我们使用了科罗拉多在线双胞胎研究(CoTwins;887对年龄为13.98-19.05的双胞胎)的数据,并从实验室和在线评价的四项EF任务中构建了实验室共同EF因子和在线共同EF因子。实验室常见和在线常见EF因子在基因上相同(rA=1.00),但表型上可分离(r=.77,95%置信区间[0.59,0.94]),表明这些EF因子具有相同的遗传基础,但可能受到环境因素的不同影响。我们检测了EF因素与实验室评估的一般认知能力因素(g)之间的表型、遗传和环境相关性,发现实验室常见EF和g与在线常见EF和g,这些结果表明,在不同背景下评估的常见EF因素彼此高度相关,并且与其他认知结果类似。这些发现表明,在线基于任务的EF评估可能是在大规模研究中增加样本量的可行策略,特别是在基因知情研究中。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Associations between executive functions assessed in different contexts in a genetically informative sample.

Executive functions (EFs) are cognitive functions that help direct goal-related behavior. EFs are usually measured via behavioral tasks assessed in highly controlled laboratory settings under the supervision of a research assistant. Online versions of EF tasks are an increasingly popular alternative to in-lab testing. However, researchers do not have the same control over the testing environment during online EF assessments. To assess the extent to which EFs assessed in-lab and online are related, we used data from the Colorado Online Twin Study (CoTwins; 887 individual twins aged 13.98-19.05) and constructed an Lab Common EF factor and an Online Common EF factor from four EF tasks assessed in-lab and online. The Lab Common and Online Common EF factors were genetically identical (rA = 1.00) but phenotypically separable (r = .77, 95% confidence interval [0.59, 0.94]) indicating that these EF factors have the same genetic underpinnings but may be differentially influenced by environmental factors. We examined phenotypic, genetic, and environmental correlations between the EF factors and a general cognitive ability factor (g) assessed in the lab and found similar relationships between Lab Common EF and g and Online Common EF and g. Overall, these results suggest that Common EF factors assessed in different contexts are highly related to each other and similarly related to other cognitive outcomes. These findings indicate that online task-based EF assessments could be a viable strategy for increasing sample sizes in large-scale studies, particularly genetically informed studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
期刊最新文献
Bypassing versus correcting misinformation: Efficacy and fundamental processes. Risky hybrid foraging: The impact of risk, reward value, and prevalence on foraging behavior in hybrid visual search. Shortcuts to insincerity: Texting abbreviations seem insincere and not worth answering. Confidence regulates feedback processing during human probabilistic learning. Does affective processing require awareness? On the use of the Perceptual Awareness Scale in response priming research.
×
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