Retest Reliability of Integrated Speed–Accuracy Measures. (June 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bakun Emesh, Tamar; Garbi, Dror; Kaplan, Alon; Zelicha, Hila; Yaskolka Meir, Anat; Tsaban, Gal; Rinott, Ehud; Meiran, Nachshon
• Is Part Of: Assessment. Volume 29:Number 4(2022)
• Page Start: 717
• Page End: 730
• Publication Date: 2022-06
• Subjects: retest reliability -- cognitive tasks -- individual differences -- executive functions -- speed–accuracy integration; Psychological tests -- Periodicals; Psychodiagnostics -- Periodicals; Personality tests -- Periodicals; 150.287
• DOI: 10.1177/1073191120985609
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1073-1911

Abstract

Cognitive tasks borrowed from experimental psychology are often used to assess individual differences. A cardinal issue of this transition from experimental to correlational designs is reduced retest reliability of some well-established cognitive effects as well as speed–accuracy trade-off. The present study aimed to address these issues by examining the retest reliability of various methods for speed–accuracy integration and by comparing between two types of task modeling: difference scores and residual scores. Results from three studies on executive functions show that (a) integrated speed–accuracy scoring is generally more reliable as compared with nonintegrated methods: mean response time and accuracy; and (b) task modeling, especially residual scores, reduced reliability. We thus recommend integrating speed and accuracy, at least for measuring executive functions.