Section 286 of 440
Complete canonical tutorial. This reader section contains the same teaching body as PWR-104 · Cognitive flexibility. Open the Power dossier.
PWR-104 · Attention & Executive Control
Classify rule-switch errors in a completed fictional sorting log
This tutorial teaches how to audit a completed two-rule card-sort record without asking anyone to sort cards. You will derive the correct bin from the visible rule, compare it with a fictional chosen bin, and call an error perseveration only when the old rule predicts the recorded wrong response. You will also separate a supported repeat from the first switch and keep personality, autism and clinical claims out of the result.
Tutorial curriculum · current public edition · Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition
Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition · complete governed research tutorial
Classify rule-switch errors in a completed fictional sorting log
This tutorial teaches how to audit a completed two-rule card-sort record without asking anyone to sort cards. You will derive the correct bin from the visible rule, compare it with a fictional chosen bin, and call an error perseveration only when the old rule predicts the recorded wrong response. You will also separate a supported repeat from the first switch and keep personality, autism and clinical claims out of the result.
Authority and safety
- Governance ceiling: explanation and static fictional record analysis only. Capability self-practice, live administration, protocol delivery and efficacy claims are not authorised until the recorded next_gate adjudication changes.
- Use only the supplied completed fictional sorting log. Do not administer cards, hide rules, surprise a participant, remove support or increase switches.
- The record cannot establish flexibility, rigidity, autism, obsessive symptoms, personality, creativity or cognitive health.
Exact materials
- The twelve-row completed fictional sorting log below
- Rule A card: colour — teal to Bin 1 and amber to Bin 2
- Rule B card: shape — circle to Bin 1 and triangle to Bin 2
- A scoring sheet with correct, perseveration and other-error columns
- The staged key, kept closed until every fictional choice is classified
Set up in this order
- Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY. Do not ask anyone to place a card.
- For each row, read the active rule before the card. Derive the correct bin from that rule and ignore the previous rule until error classification.
- Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin. Mark CORRECT when they match.
- For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected. Mark PERSEVERATION only when the recorded wrong bin matches that old-rule answer.
- Mark any other wrong response OTHER ERROR. A congruent card cannot uniquely show perseveration because both rules point to the same bin.
- Report pre-switch, first-switch and supported-switch segments separately. Name cue, cards and phase order.
- Finish with a bounded statement: the record describes rule use in this fictional sort only and does not measure a person.
Supplied fixture
| Pass | Trial | Cue visible | Card | Active rule | Fictional chosen bin |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | Rule A | teal circle | Colour | 1 |
| 1 | 2 | Rule A | amber triangle | Colour | 2 |
| 1 | 3 | Rule A | teal triangle | Colour | 1 |
| 1 | 4 | Rule A | amber circle | Colour | 2 |
| 1 | 5 | CHANGE → Rule B | teal triangle | Shape | 1 |
| 1 | 6 | Rule B | amber circle | Shape | 2 |
| 1 | 7 | Rule B | teal circle | Shape | 1 |
| 1 | 8 | Rule B | amber triangle | Shape | 2 |
| 2 | 9 | Rule A | teal triangle | Colour | 1 |
| 2 | 10 | Rule A | amber circle | Colour | 2 |
| 2 | 11 | LARGE CHANGE → Rule B | amber circle | Shape | 1 |
| 2 | 12 | Rule B remains visible | teal triangle | Shape | 2 |
Check your work only after you finish
Lock every response first. The checking page is separate so the answers are not exposed inside this exercise.
Scoring rule
Award 1 for each correctly derived bin (12), 1 for each correctly classified recorded choice (12), 1 for identifying the two perseverations, 1 for the congruent-card limitation, 1 for naming phase/support/order confounds and 1 for a bounded non-person claim: 28 points total. No administration or capability practice is authorised.
Worked example
- At trial 5 the active rule is shape and the card is a teal triangle, so the correct bin is 2.
- The fictional choice is 1, so the row is wrong.
- Apply the immediately previous colour rule only for classification: teal would have gone to 1.
- Because the wrong choice matches the old-rule answer, label trial 5 PERSEVERATION.
- Repeat the method for all rows. The record totals 10/12, with two first-switch perseverations and none in the supported segment.
Correct result: The audit distinguishes correctness from a specific old-rule error. It does not administer a flexibility task or prove a transition aid caused improvement.
Right and wrong
| Moment | Right / safer | Wrong / riskier | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Finding the correct bin | Use the active rule printed on that row. | Use whichever rule was learned first. | Correctness belongs to the declared current rule. |
| Naming perseveration | Require the wrong choice to match the old-rule answer on a conflict card. | Call every error perseveration. | Other errors and congruent cards do not uniquely indicate the old rule. |
| Comparing segments | Name the visible aid, different cards and later order. | Say the larger cue cured rigidity. | The static record is confounded and not a trait assessment. |
| Authority | Analyse the completed choices. | Ask a participant to sort or tolerate surprise switches. | Guide permission is not ready. |
Common mistakes and fixes
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| Correct bins are visible beside the task before scoring. | Keep them in the staged answer key only. |
| A wrong congruent card is called perseveration. | Use OTHER ERROR because both rules predict the same bin. |
| The supported segment is called causal evidence. | Preserve support, item and order differences. |
| The log is used to describe personality or autism. | Stop and return to rule-by-rule fictional record language. |
Evidence boundary
What the tutorial may—and may not—claim.
Supportable claim
People improve on practiced switching games, but active-controlled trials do not establish broad cognitive flexibility or real-world adaptability.
Measurement boundary
Set-shift cost and rule-change errors are task measures; they do not establish creativity, open-mindedness, resilience or social conformity.
Become adaptable to anything
MetricRule-change cost and errors plus a separate meaningful adaptation outcome
BoundaryA game cannot establish creativity, resilience, open-mindedness or human worth.
Negative and limiting findings
- A large 58-session active-controlled trial found no training-specific cognitive benefit; improvements were consistent with retest, expectancy or motivation.
Prohibited wording
- Become infinitely adaptable
- Train away autistic rigidity
- Brain games make you open-minded
- Flexibility prevents cognitive decline
Direct source register
Evidence that supports—and limits—the route.
Adrian M Owen; Adam Hampshire; Jessica A Grahn; Robert Stenton; Said Dajani; Alistair S Burns; Robert J Howard; Clive G Ballard · 2010 · PRIMARY_RESEARCH
This source is bound only to existence, limiting finding, trainability, transfer within the declared PWR-104 dossier. It does not independently authorise universal efficacy, far transfer, diagnosis, clinical use or unsafe progression.
Julia Karbach; Jutta Kray · 2009 · PRIMARY_RESEARCH
This source is bound only to existence, limiting finding, trainability, transfer within the declared PWR-104 dossier. It does not independently authorise universal efficacy, far transfer, diagnosis, clinical use or unsafe progression.
Pia Grönholm-Nyman; Anna Soveri; Juha O Rinne; Elina Ek; Anna Nyholm; Anna Stigsdotter Neely; Matti Laine · 2017 · PRIMARY_RESEARCH
This source is bound only to existence, limiting finding, trainability, transfer within the declared PWR-104 dossier. It does not independently authorise universal efficacy, far transfer, diagnosis, clinical use or unsafe progression.
Jessika I V Buitenweg; Renée M van de Ven; Sanne Prinssen; Jaap M J Murre; K Richard Ridderinkhof · 2017 · PRIMARY_RESEARCH
This source is bound only to existence, limiting finding, trainability, transfer within the declared PWR-104 dossier. It does not independently authorise universal efficacy, far transfer, diagnosis, clinical use or unsafe progression.
Tutorial delivery controls
Learn, adapt, troubleshoot and resume
Progress is saved only in this browser on this device.
Step-by-step learner mode
Each activity includes its success check, a nearby accessible alternative and an “I’m stuck” correction path. Alternatives preserve the target where possible; when they change the task, Titan labels them as related rather than equivalent.
Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY
Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY. Do not ask anyone to place a card.
“Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY” fixes the exact Cognitive flexibility configuration or decision before later observations are compared.
A legible entry directly completes “Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.
I’m stuck on this step
Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY. Do not ask anyone to place a card.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.
Possible snag: The result from “Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY. Do not ask anyone to place a card.” does not yet meet this declared check: A legible entry directly completes “Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.
Correction: Return to the start of “Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “A legible entry directly completes “Write STATIC LOG ANALYSIS ONLY” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.”
Stop / get help: Titan teaches a complete Power-specific research method because operational capability practice is not currently justified. Stop if the declared configuration cannot be maintained, uncertainty becomes material, adverse effects appear, or qualified authority is required.
For each row, read the active rule before the card
For each row, read the active rule before the card. Derive the correct bin from that rule and ignore the previous rule until error classification.
“For each row, read the active rule before the card” isolates the named evidence distinction so the learner can interpret Cognitive flexibility without extending the claim.
The output directly answers “For each row, read the active rule before the card”, names the relevant distinction and stays within the supplied record.
I’m stuck on this step
Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “For each row, read the active rule before the card. Derive the correct bin from that rule and ignore the previous rule until error classification.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.
Possible snag: Correct bins are visible beside the task before scoring.
Correction: Keep them in the staged answer key only.
Stop / get help: Titan teaches a complete Power-specific research method because operational capability practice is not currently justified. Stop if the declared configuration cannot be maintained, uncertainty becomes material, adverse effects appear, or qualified authority is required.
Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin
Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin. Mark CORRECT when they match.
“Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin” keeps this lesson inside its declared record-analysis boundary and prevents the supplied scenario from being mistaken for physical practice.
The output directly answers “Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin”, names the relevant distinction and stays within the supplied record.
I’m stuck on this step
Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin. Mark CORRECT when they match.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.
Possible snag: The result from “Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin. Mark CORRECT when they match.” does not yet meet this declared check: The output directly answers “Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin”, names the relevant distinction and stays within the supplied record.
Correction: Return to the start of “Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “The output directly answers “Compare the derived bin with the fictional chosen bin”, names the relevant distinction and stays within the supplied record.”
Stop / get help: Titan teaches a complete Power-specific research method because operational capability practice is not currently justified. Stop if the declared configuration cannot be maintained, uncertainty becomes material, adverse effects appear, or qualified authority is required.
For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule…
For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected. Mark PERSEVERATION only when the recorded wrong bin matches that old-rule answer.
“For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected” creates the auditable value, condition or statement needed for the tutorial’s later comparison and conclusion.
The work shows the value requested by “For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected”, retains the supplied units or signs and leaves any unsupported value unknown.
I’m stuck on this step
Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected. Mark PERSEVERATION only when the recorded wrong bin matches that old-rule answer.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.
Possible snag: The result from “For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected. Mark PERSEVERATION only when the recorded wrong bin matches that old-rule answer.” does not yet meet this declared check: The work shows the value requested by “For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected”, retains the supplied units or signs and leaves any unsupported value unknown.
Correction: Return to the start of “For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule…”, reduce complexity or pace, and repeat only the part needed to satisfy: “The work shows the value requested by “For a wrong choice after a switch, calculate what the old rule would have selected”, retains the supplied units or signs and leaves any unsupported value unknown.”
Stop / get help: Titan teaches a complete Power-specific research method because operational capability practice is not currently justified. Stop if the declared configuration cannot be maintained, uncertainty becomes material, adverse effects appear, or qualified authority is required.
Mark any other wrong response OTHER ERROR
Mark any other wrong response OTHER ERROR. A congruent card cannot uniquely show perseveration because both rules point to the same bin.
Keep this exact Cognitive flexibility action explicit and reviewable: “Mark any other wrong response OTHER ERROR. A congruent card cannot uniquely show perseveration because both rules point to the same bin.”
Evidence of completion shows the learner followed this exact instruction without adding an unstated step: “Mark any other wrong response OTHER ERROR. A congruent card cannot uniquely show perseveration because both rules point to the same bin.”
I’m stuck on this step
Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Mark any other wrong response OTHER ERROR. A congruent card cannot uniquely show perseveration because both rules point to the same bin.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.
Possible snag: A wrong congruent card is called perseveration.
Correction: Use OTHER ERROR because both rules predict the same bin.
Stop / get help: Titan teaches a complete Power-specific research method because operational capability practice is not currently justified. Stop if the declared configuration cannot be maintained, uncertainty becomes material, adverse effects appear, or qualified authority is required.
Report pre-switch, first-switch and supported-switch segments separately
Report pre-switch, first-switch and supported-switch segments separately. Name cue, cards and phase order.
“Report pre-switch, first-switch and supported-switch segments separately” establishes the exact Cognitive flexibility question or boundary that every later comparison must preserve.
Evidence of completion shows the learner followed this exact instruction without adding an unstated step: “Report pre-switch, first-switch and supported-switch segments separately. Name cue, cards and phase order.”
I’m stuck on this step
Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Report pre-switch, first-switch and supported-switch segments separately. Name cue, cards and phase order.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.
Possible snag: The supported segment is called causal evidence.
Correction: Preserve support, item and order differences.
Stop / get help: Titan teaches a complete Power-specific research method because operational capability practice is not currently justified. Stop if the declared configuration cannot be maintained, uncertainty becomes material, adverse effects appear, or qualified authority is required.
Finish with a bounded statement: the record describes rule use in this…
Finish with a bounded statement: the record describes rule use in this fictional sort only and does not measure a person.
“Finish with a bounded statement: the record describes rule use in this fictional sort only and does not measure a person” keeps this lesson inside its declared record-analysis boundary and prevents the supplied scenario from being mistaken for physical practice.
A legible entry directly completes “Finish with a bounded statement: the record describes rule use in this fictional sort only and does not measure a person” and records the requested condition, decision or boundary without adding a new claim.
I’m stuck on this step
Reset: Re-read this authored instruction — “Finish with a bounded statement: the record describes rule use in this fictional sort only and does not measure a person.” — and its success check, then attempt only this step.
Possible snag: The log is used to describe personality or autism.
Correction: Stop and return to rule-by-rule fictional record language.
Stop / get help: Titan teaches a complete Power-specific research method because operational capability practice is not currently justified. Stop if the declared configuration cannot be maintained, uncertainty becomes material, adverse effects appear, or qualified authority is required.
Correct versus incorrect execution
These accessible process diagrams are built from the tutorial’s own right/wrong teaching. They are not anatomical illustrations and do not add technique beyond the canonical tutorial.
Use the active rule printed on that row.
Use whichever rule was learned first.
Require the wrong choice to match the old-rule answer on a conflict card.
Call every error perseveration.
Name the visible aid, different cards and later order.
Say the larger cue cured rigidity.
Analyse the completed choices.
Ask a participant to sort or tolerate surprise switches.
Method-structure checklist
10 of 10 structural checks present
- Ordered, Power-specific instructions — present
- Every activity has a success check — present
- Materials or supplied records are declared — present
- Measurement or assessment rule is present — present
- Tutorial-specific troubleshooting is present — present
- Stopping or escalation boundary is present — present
- Every activity has an adjacent alternative — present
- Correct-versus-incorrect comparison is present — present
- Evidence context is bound to the Power record — present
- Planning metadata is present — present
The method-readiness band and presence checklist assess tutorial presentation and are separate from evidence quality for the underlying Power. They are automated editorial aids, not human approval.
Manual editorial sign-off: Pending. This tutorial must not display a human-approved state until an identified editor signs the exact content hash.