Smart phone, smart science: How the use of smartphones can revolutionize research in cognitive science

PLoS ONE

Volumn 6, Issue 9, 2011, Pages

  Dufau, Stephane ^a,b   Duñabeitia, Jon Andoni ^c   Moret Tatay, Carmen ^d   McGonigal, Aileen ^e   Peeters, David ^a,f   Alario, F Xavier ^a,b   Balota, David A ^g   Brysbaert, Marc ^h   Carreiras, Manuel ^c,i   Ferrand, Ludovic ^j   Ktori, Maria ^a,b   Perea, Manuel ^k   Rastle, Kathy ^l   Sasburg, Olivier ^a,b   Yap, Melvin J ^m   Ziegler, Johannes C ^a,b   Grainger, Jonathan ^a,b  

^a CNRS   (France)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

^c BASQUE CENTER ON COGNITION   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE VALENCIA SAN VICENTE MÁRTIR   (Spain)

^e INSERM   (France)

^f International Max Planck Research School for Language Sciences   (Netherlands)

^g WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^h GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

ⁱ BASQUE FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCE   (Spain)

^j UNIVERSITÉ CLERMONT AUVERGNE   (France)

^k UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

^l UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^m NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; COGNITION; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LINGUISTICS; MASS COMMUNICATION; READING; SMART PHONE; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; ATTENTION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; LANGUAGE; MEMORY; METHODOLOGY; MICROCOMPUTER; MOBILE PHONE; PSYCHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; RESEARCH;

ATTENTION; CELLULAR PHONE; COGNITION; COGNITIVE SCIENCE; COMPUTERS, HANDHELD; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MEMORY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH; SOFTWARE;

EID: 80053254127     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024974     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Killingsworth MA, Gilbert DT, (2010) A wandering mind is an unhappy mind. Science 330: 932.
2. Nosek BA, Smyth FL, Sriram N, Lindner NM, Devos T, et al. (2009) National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106: 10593-10597.
3. Posner MI, (1978) Chronometric explorations of mind Hillsdale, N.J. Erlbaum.
4. Luce RD, (1986) Response times: Their role in inferring elementary mental organization New-York Oxford University Press.
5. Donders FC, (1868) Die schnelligkeit psychischer processe. Reichert's und Dubois-Reymond's archiv für anatomie, physiologie und wissenschaftliche medizin pp. 657-681.
6. Cattell JM, (1886) The time taken up by cerebral operations. Mind 11: 220-242.
7. Rubenstein H, Garfield L, Millikan JA, (1970) Homographic entries in the internal lexicon. J Verb Learn Verb BE 9: 487-494.
8. Meyer RE, Schvaneveldt RW, (1971) Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. J Exp Psychol 90: 227-234.
9. Smith PL, Ratcliff R, (2004) Psychology and neurobiology of simple decisions. Trends Neurosci 27: 161-168.
10. Ratcliff R, Gomez P, McKoon G, (2004) A diffusion model account of the lexical decision task. Psychol Rev 111: 159-182.
11. Wagenmakers EJ, Ratcliff R, Gomez P, McKoon G, (2008) A diffusion model account of criterion shifts in the lexical decision task. J Mem Lang 58: 140-159.
12. Balota DA, Yap MJ, Cortese MJ, Hutchison KA, Kessler B, et al. (2007) The English Lexicon Project. Behav Res Methods 39: 445-459.