Skip to content
CogniStride
Menu

Methods & references

The published methods behind each exercise

Each CogniStride module is built on a task format described in the research and clinical literature. This page lists those sources and sets out what CogniStride does, and does not, claim.

What we claim and what we don’t. CogniStride implements established task formats as computerised practice exercises and records performance on them. CogniStride itself has not been evaluated in clinical studies; its scores are not validated or normed measures, and it is not a medical device. The references below describe where each task comes from. They are not evidence that using CogniStride produces any clinical outcome.

Working memory: N-Back

The n-back task originated as a test of short-term retention of rapidly changing information; the dual (visual + auditory) version was popularised as a training task. CogniStride uses the dual format with spatial and letter streams and scores responses with standard signal-detection measures.

  • Kirchner, W. K. (1958). Age differences in short-term retention of rapidly changing information. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(4), 352–358.
  • Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Jonides, J., & Perrig, W. J. (2008). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(19), 6829–6833.

Inhibition: Stroop and Flanker

CogniStride presents colour-word and arrow versions of these conflict tasks and reports the difference in reaction time between congruent and incongruent trials.

  • Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662.
  • Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16(1), 143–149.

Visual scanning: star cancellation and neglect

The cancellation field follows the star cancellation format (target stars among distractors). The centre of cancellation summarises where found targets lie across the field. The left anchor line follows the visual anchoring approach used in scanning training.

  • Wilson, B., Cockburn, J., & Halligan, P. (1987). Development of a behavioral test of visuospatial neglect. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 68(2), 98–102.
  • Rorden, C., & Karnath, H.-O. (2010). A simple measure of neglect severity. Neuropsychologia, 48(9), 2758–2763.
  • Weinberg, J., Diller, L., Gordon, W. A., Gerstman, L. J., Lieberman, A., Lakin, P., Hodges, G., & Ezrachi, O. (1977). Visual scanning training effect on reading-related tasks in acquired right brain damage. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 58(11), 479–486.

Language: semantic feature analysis and cueing

The feature chart uses the standard SFA feature categories; the cueing ladder moves from least to most support, in the spirit of cueing-hierarchy approaches to word retrieval.

  • Boyle, M., & Coelho, C. A. (1995). Application of semantic feature analysis as a treatment for aphasic dysnomia. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 4(4), 94–98.
  • Linebaugh, C. W., & Lehner, L. H. (1977). Cueing hierarchies and word retrieval: A therapy program. In R. H. Brookshire (Ed.), Clinical Aphasiology: Conference Proceedings. BRK Publishers.

Clock drawing

The 0–5 levels used for the suggested clock score are modelled on the hierarchical scoring described by Shulman; the clinician makes the final judgement.

  • Shulman, K. I. (2000). Clock-drawing: Is it the ideal cognitive screening test? International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 15(6), 548–561.

Baseline screening scores (recorded, not administered)

CogniStride lets you record scores from these instruments and shows their commonly used severity bands. It does not include, administer or score the instruments themselves. MoCA is a trademark of its owner.

  • Nasreddine, Z. S., Phillips, N. A., Bédirian, V., Charbonneau, S., Whitehead, V., Collin, I., Cummings, J. L., & Chertkow, H. (2005). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: A brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(4), 695–699.
  • Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3), 189–198.
  • Brott, T., Adams, H. P., Olinger, C. P., Marler, J. R., Barsan, W. G., Biller, J., Spilker, J., Holleran, R., Eberle, R., Hertzberg, V., Rorick, M., Moomaw, C. J., & Walker, M. (1989). Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: A clinical examination scale. Stroke, 20(7), 864–870.

CogniStride’s own components

Some parts of CogniStride are practical tools rather than published methods:

  • The 0–10 mental-effort rating is CogniStride’s own simple self-report scale for pacing sessions. It is not the Borg CR10 or any other published scale.
  • The everyday executive tasks (recipe sequencing, timed burners, micro-budgeting) and the time and money problems are original functional practice tasks.
  • The domain profile chart combines your own ratings with a moving average of exercise accuracy. It is a visual summary, not a standardised score.
  • The guided breathing break uses a 4-4-4-4 “box breathing” rhythm as a short, structured rest.

Found an error?

If a reference is incorrect or a description could be clearer, please let us know.