This study investigated the feasibility, reliability, and validity of abbreviated versions of four neurocognitive tasks-typically used to assess attention, working memory, and executive functions (i.e., the Oddball, n-Back, Stroop, and Flanker tasks). To reduce the effects of response variability and physiological noise, neurocognitive assessments typically require numerous stimulus trials per task, causing each task to often exceed 20 minutes in duration. Such long durations can contribute to participant fatigue and practical constraints, especially when multiple neurocognitive tasks are administered in a single session to evaluate neurocognitive performance across domains. To address this, we evaluated whether abbreviated versions of the tasks-each limited to a maximum duration of four minutes-could serve as reliable alternatives. A total of 57 healthy young adult participants completed the four aforementioned tasks administered through a custom-built, cross-platform mobile application. Response accuracy and reaction times were then analyzed to assess cognitive performance. Statistical analyses confirmed significant expected effects between different stimuli and experimental conditions within each task. Moreover, high split-half intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) indicated excellent internal consistency, demonstrating that the abbreviated versions yielded stable and reproducible results across all tasks. These findings support the use of the presented abbreviated tasks as efficient proxy measures for defined facets of executive functions, offering practical alternatives without compromising data integrity.
Alikaei et al. (Wed,) studied this question.