An evaluation of the required number of training sessions of neuropsychological assessments on portable mobile devices

Jansen, Jim; Van de Loo, Aurora JAE; Garssen, Johan; Scholey, Andrew; Tiplady, Brian; Verster, Joris C. · 2025 · Crossref

DOI: 10.59400/apr2345

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study evaluated the comparability of neuropsychological assessments conducted on mobile phones versus tablets and determined the number of training sessions required to achieve stable performance. The research was motivated by the increasing use of portable devices for ecological momentary assessment in everyday settings, where screen size and input methods vary significantly. Specifically, the authors sought to determine if cognitive test scores obtained from a small-screen mobile phone (6 cm diagonal, keypad) were equivalent to those from a larger tablet (18 cm diagonal, touchscreen), and whether the smaller interface required greater subjective effort or more practice to master. The study employed a within-subject crossover design with 39 healthy volunteers aged 18–30. Participants completed five training sessions and one final test session on both devices. The 18-minute test battery consisted of six tasks measuring attention (Number Pairs, Arrow Flankers), psychomotor functioning (Arrow Reaction Time), working memory (Memory Scanning), paired associate learning (Shape Pairs), and comprehension (Serial Sevens). Outcome measures included mean reaction time and percentage of errors. Subjective mental effort was assessed using a visual analog scale after each session. Statistical analyses included repeated-measures ANOVA for practice effects and paired-samples t-tests for platform comparisons. Results indicated that performance scores were highly comparable between the two platforms. No statistically significant differences were found in reaction times or error rates between the phone and tablet, with effect sizes remaining small (< 0.25). Correlations between phone and tablet scores ranged from 0.53 to 0.82, indicating reasonable to good agreement, except for Shape Pairs errors, which showed a low correlation. Regarding training requirements, reaction time data suggested that simple tasks like Arrow Reaction Time and Arrow Flankers required only one familiarization run, while other tests required three to four sessions to stabilize performance. No significant differences in perceived mental effort were observed between devices or across sessions. The findings conclude that mobile phones with small screens are suitable for assessing cognition in everyday settings, yielding data comparable to larger tablets. The study recommends a minimum of three training sessions to ensure stable baseline performance, regardless of the device used. However, the authors note that specific populations, such as the elderly or patients with cognitive disorders, may require additional training. These results support the validity of using diverse portable devices for neuropsychological testing, facilitating more flexible and naturalistic research designs.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• mobile phones