Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Problem-Solving01:29

Problem-Solving

477
Effective problem-solving consists of two steps: 1. identifying the problem and 2. selecting the appropriate problem-solving strategy (i.e., a plan of action used to find a solution). Humans use four problem-solving strategies:
477
Mathematical Modeling: Problem Solving01:29

Mathematical Modeling: Problem Solving

246
Mathematical modeling transforms real-world scenarios into mathematical expressions, allowing for structured problem-solving and analysis. This process involves defining the situation, assigning variables to measurable quantities, selecting an appropriate model, and solving the resulting equation. Such models are invaluable in finance, providing precise methods to evaluate investments, loans, and repayment structures.A widely used example is the calculation of fixed monthly payments on a loan,...
246
Principle of Moments: Problem Solving01:30

Principle of Moments: Problem Solving

1.2K
The principle of moments is a fundamental concept in physics and engineering. It refers to the balancing of forces and moments around a point or axis, also known as the pivot. This principle is used in many real-life scenarios, including construction, sports, and daily activities like opening doors and pushing objects.
One such scenario involves a pole placed in a three-dimensional system with a cable attached. When a tension is applied to the cable, the moment about the z-axis passing through...
1.2K
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving01:29

Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving

271
Mechanistic models play a crucial role in algorithms for numerical problem-solving, particularly in nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NMEM). These models aim to minimize specific objective functions by evaluating various parameter estimates, leading to the development of systematic algorithms. In some cases, linearization techniques approximate the model using linear equations.
In individual population analyses, different algorithms are employed, such as Cauchy's method, which uses a...
271
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

6.8K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
6.8K
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

5.0K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
5.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Telerehabilitation in children and adolescents with intellectual disability: a systematic review.

Frontiers in psychiatry·2026
Same author

Multi-method validation of the new computerized test of fluid intelligence MatriKS.

Behavior research methods·2026
Same author

Error patterns on a computerized version of Raven's progressive matrices in specific learning disorders.

Frontiers in psychology·2026
Same author

Prolonged Visual Entrainment Induces Long-Lasting Alpha-Band Modulations.

Psychophysiology·2026
Same author

Sensor-Based Assessment of Morning Prospective Memory in Narcolepsy Type 1: Evidence from Children and Adult Cohorts.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Development and validation of a short form of the Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0 in adolescents.

Journal of eating disorders·2026
Same journal

Testing linear hypotheses in repeated measures generalized linear models using external information.

Psychometrika·2026
Same journal

When Do Unifactorial Items Increase the Reliability?

Psychometrika·2026
Same journal

Longitudinal Designs for Diagnostic Models: Identification and Estimation.

Psychometrika·2026
Same journal

Modeling Rare Events and Nonmonotone Nonignorable Missingness of Time-Varying Outcomes and Predictors in Binary Time-Series Daily Diary Data: A Bayesian Selection Model.

Psychometrika·2026
Same journal

Revelle's Beta: The Wait Is Over-Computation Becomes Possible.

Psychometrika·2026
Same journal

On dimensional implication graphs.

Psychometrika·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 11, 2026

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.4K

Two Markov Solution Process Models for the Assessment of Planning in Problem Solving.

Andrea Brancaccio1, Debora de Chiusole1, Ottavia M Epifania1

  • 1Department FISPPA, https://ror.org/00240q980University of Padua, Italy.

Psychometrika
|November 13, 2025
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study differentiates pre-planning from interim-planning in tower tasks. Findings show pre-planning suits older individuals (14+), while interim-planning fits younger children (4-8), aligning with developmental research.

Keywords:
Markov modelsproblem spaceproblem-solving modelingprocedural knowledge space theorytower of London test

More Related Videos

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.3K
Practical Methodology of Cognitive Tasks Within a Navigational Assessment
05:19

Practical Methodology of Cognitive Tasks Within a Navigational Assessment

Published on: June 1, 2015

14.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 11, 2026

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities
10:26

Problem-Solving Before Instruction PS-I: A Protocol for Assessment and Intervention in Students with Different Abilities

Published on: September 11, 2021

4.4K
The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.3K
Practical Methodology of Cognitive Tasks Within a Navigational Assessment
05:19

Practical Methodology of Cognitive Tasks Within a Navigational Assessment

Published on: June 1, 2015

14.0K

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Developmental Psychology
  • Neuroscience

Background:

  • Tower tasks are widely used to assess planning abilities.
  • Analyzing move sequences offers insights into cognitive planning strategies.
  • Distinguishing between pre-planning and interim-planning is crucial for understanding task execution.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose and validate a model for interim-planning in tower tasks.
  • To compare the proposed interim-planning model with an existing pre-planning model.
  • To investigate developmental differences in planning strategies using these models.

Main Methods:

  • Development of an interim-planning model.
  • Empirical comparison of pre-planning and interim-planning models.
  • Analysis of move sequences and time performance in participants aged 4-14+.

Main Results:

  • The pre-planning model demonstrated a better fit for individuals aged 14 and older.
  • The interim-planning model showed a superior fit for individuals aged 4 to 8.
  • Time performance analysis corroborated the age-related model fits.

Conclusions:

  • Planning strategies in tower tasks evolve with age.
  • Younger children (4-8) utilize interim-planning, integrating planning with action.
  • Adolescents and adults (14+) predominantly employ pre-planning, strategizing before execution.