Hedge, Craig ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
PDF
- Accepted Post-Print Version
Download (339kB) |
Abstract
Measuring psychological abilities or traits is trickier than it seems from the published literatures ( 1 ). We try to study abstract psychological constructs like ‘inhibition’ or ‘impulsivity’, but we can only measure these indirectly through behaviours such as reaction times or self-report ratings. When we apply these measures in clinical and individual differences research, our goal is typically to understand why a patient group appear to be (e.g.) more ‘impulsive’ than healthy controls, or to use measures of ‘inhibition’ to predict a clinical outcome. There are many potential pitfalls and wrong turns in the path towards achieving this goal. In our recent work, we have shown that our intuitions about what makes a good cognitive task can sometimes lead us astray ( 2 , 3 ). Here, we discuss how these issues intersect with the goals of computational psychiatry.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Date Type: | Publication |
Status: | Published |
Schools: | Psychology |
Publisher: | Elsevier |
ISSN: | 2451-9022 |
Date of First Compliant Deposit: | 22 May 2020 |
Date of Acceptance: | 13 May 2020 |
Last Modified: | 22 Nov 2024 08:15 |
URI: | https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/131892 |
Citation Data
Cited 8 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data
Actions (repository staff only)
![]() |
Edit Item |