Claims

Net change detection accuracy does not differ significantly between children and adults

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? A-primes averaged across cued and uncued shapes did not differ significantly between adults and children, with children numerically higher. → Plebanek 2017

Evidence

Plebanek 2017

Plebanek, D. J., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2017). Costs of Selective Attention: When Children Notice what Adults Miss. Psychological Science, 28(6), 723-732. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617693005

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Secondary analysis in Experiment 1 averaging A-primes across cued and uncued shapes: "the net accuracy ... did not differ significantly between adults and children" (p > .250), with children numerically higher (.818 vs. .787). No effect size is printed for this comparison.

"the net accuracy (i.e., A-primes averaged across cued and uncued shapes) did not differ significantly between adults and children (.787 vs. .818, respectively p > .250), with children exhibiting numerically greater net accuracy"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id net-accuracy-no-difference-change-detection
title Net change detection accuracy does not differ significantly between children and adults
description Net change detection accuracy does not differ significantly between children and adults
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2017
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — plebanek-2017

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.