Flexibilidade cognitiva e o contexto de trabalho: Revisão integrativa da literatura

Abstract

Sistema de avaliação: às cegas por pares (double blind review).

The Stroop Paradigm in Brazilian Studies: A Scoping Review

“…Figures Test (e.g., Elage, 2016;Martins, 2020). Years earlier, this trend was also observed in a study with North American psychologists, with the participation of 512 neuropsychologists who collected information on the use of 693 instruments, with only 40 being computerized.…”

“…Among these, the study by Duncan (2006) assessed 132 adolescents aged between 12 and 14 years and provided norms for that age for the Victoria version. With children, studies with semantic Stroop paradigms stand out, such as the one by Elage (2016), which evaluated 51 children using the day-night/boy-girl conflict, and the one by Martins (2020), with 780 children using animals (body/head conflict), both in the age group between 4 and 10 years. One aspect that could explain the smaller number of studies with children may be that the most used version is based on the automation of the reading process (Silva et al, 2017) and that clinical studies are also more present in adulthood (substance use, dementia, neurological damage).…”

“…A point to emphasize is that there were few studies with psychometric objectives (10.20%), that is, studies in which the authors adapted, constructed, or investigated evidence of validity, reliability, or provided norms for the instrument (e.g., Albertini, 2015;Brandelero & de Toni, 2015;Bueno, 2013;Campos et al, 2016;Canali et al, 2011;De Paula et al, 2017;Dias, 2009;Duncan, 2006;Elage, 2016;Fonseca et al, 2015;Guerra et al, 2021;Martins, 2020;Natale et al, 2008;Oliveira et al, 2016;Zimmermann et al, 2015). Of these, only three studies provided norms for elementary school children/adolescents (Duncan, 2006), for the 7 to 14 years age group (Oliveira et al, 2016) and the 19 to 75 years age group (Zimmermann et al, 2015).…”

O paradigma de Stroop nos estudos brasileiros: uma revisão de escopo

“…Contudo, parece crescente o uso dessa forma de aplicação, sobretudo na avaliação infantil, com recurso às versões do Stroop com figuras (por exemplo, Elage, 2016;Martins, 2020).…”

“…Esse é um achado relevante desta revisão e que destaca como recomendação para estudos futuros o necessário investimento em pesquisas com instrumentos computadorizados, ainda escassos na pesquisa nacional. Toni, 2015;Bueno, 2013;Campos et al, 2016;Canali et al, 2011;De Paula et al, 2017;Dias, 2009;Duncan, 2006;Elage, 2016;Fonseca et al, 2015;Guerra et al, 2021;Martins, 2020;Natale et al, 2008;Oliveira et al, 2016;Zimmermann et al, 2015). Destes, destacam-se os únicos três estudos que disponibilizaram normas para crianças/adolescentes do ensino fundamental (Duncan, 2006), crianças e adolescentes de 7 a 14 anos (Oliveira et al, 2016) e para a faixa etária de 19 a 75 anos (Zimmermann et al, 2015).…”