Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jul 15;9(7):e100662.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100662. eCollection 2014.

Crowdsourcing for cognitive science--the utility of smartphones

Affiliations

Crowdsourcing for cognitive science--the utility of smartphones

Harriet R Brown et al. PLoS One. .

Erratum in

  • PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e111159

Abstract

By 2015, there will be an estimated two billion smartphone users worldwide. This technology presents exciting opportunities for cognitive science as a medium for rapid, large-scale experimentation and data collection. At present, cost and logistics limit most study populations to small samples, restricting the experimental questions that can be addressed. In this study we investigated whether the mass collection of experimental data using smartphone technology is valid, given the variability of data collection outside of a laboratory setting. We presented four classic experimental paradigms as short games, available as a free app and over the first month 20,800 users submitted data. We found that the large sample size vastly outweighed the noise inherent in collecting data outside a controlled laboratory setting, and show that for all four games canonical results were reproduced. For the first time, we provide experimental validation for the use of smartphones for data collection in cognitive science, which can lead to the collection of richer data sets and a significant cost reduction as well as provide an opportunity for efficient phenotypic screening of large populations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Screenshot of the app, while playing the stop-signal reaction time game.
Fruit fell from the tree and participants were asked to tap simultaneously on both sides of the screen as the fruit passed through the circles. If a piece of fruit turned brown during its fall, participants had to inhibit their response on that side.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Demographic characteristics of app users.
(a) Gender and age breakdown. Young women were the primary app users. (b) Location. Most users originated from outside the UK, where at app was developed, and users from the UK were not concentrated in any single region. (c) The app reached participants with higher education degrees as well as those without. Only participants over 25 years of age were included in this analysis as those younger than 25 may not have completed their education. (d) Life satisfaction rated on a scale from 0–10. This information was recorded for follow-up analyses in relation to the decision-making task and is not further analysed here.
Figure 3
Figure 3. Data from the games in this app. (a) Working memory performance in ‘no distraction’ (remember red circles) and ‘distraction’ (remember red circles and ignore yellow circles) conditions, for younger and older participants.
Performance deteriorated with age and distraction, and distraction had a more detrimental effect for older compared to younger adults. (b) Stop-signal reaction time, which measures inhibitory ability, could be estimated from participant's data. (c) Probability of successful identification of T2 in the attentional blink task, for each ISI and lag. T2 recognition was significantly impaired 150–500 ms after T1 presentation, but preserved T2 recognition at lag 1 (‘Lag-1 sparing’) was noted for shorter ISIs.

References

    1. Raymond JE, Shapiro KL, Arnell KMJ (1992) Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18: 849–60. - PubMed
    1. Aron AR, Verbruggen F (2008) Stop the presses: dissociating a selective from a global mechanism for stopping. Psychological science 19: 1146–53. - PubMed
    1. Verbruggen F, Logan GD (2008) Response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm. Trends Cogn Sci 12: 418–24. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Band GP, Van Der Molen MW, Logan GD (2003) Horse-race model simulations of the stop-signal procedure. Acta Psychol(Amst) 11: 105–42. - PubMed
    1. Sokol-Hessner P, Hsu M, Curley NG, Delgado MR, Camerer CF, et al. (2009) Thinking like a trader selectively reduces individuals' loss aversion. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 5035–40. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources