PROBLEMClinical tests of cognitive efficiency which require attention and concentration, such as paired associate tests of learning used in the Wechsler Memory Scale, the Babcock-Levy tests and the differential diagnostic test of Inglis (' 1, are subject to diurnal variation in efficiency. However, existing evidence by Gates@' * ) and Ulich and Fischer (l) established the presence of substantial variation only for groups of subjects who were mainly children. This study investigates whether learning efficiency varies significantly in adult individuals. METHODSubjects. Ss were 12 patients, 3 males and 9 females, in medical and surgical wards of a general hospital who were convalescing from a minor illness of medical or surgical nature. Their mean age was 45 years (range 29 to 63) and intelligence in the average range with only one S in the superior (Grade I) and one S in the dull category (Grade IV) as measured by the Progressive Matrices (1938).Test. 24 individual sets of 6-pair paired associate tests using pairs of unrelated AA words from Thorndike and Lorge(6) were given to each S over 8 days, that is three each day, at 8:30 a.m., 1:00 p.m. and 6:GO p.m., in each case after meals. The score was the total number of errors made before the criterion of 3 consecutive correct anticipations for all pairs was reached. The presentation of pairs was randomized to make sure that each pair was learned separately. The sets of 6 pairs were given in the same order to all Ss. RESULTSOwing to the presence of error decrements in successive learning trials and particularly high decrements during the first day, a fact which added curvatures to what essentially were declining straight lines for all Ss, the data was analysed for 6 days (i.e., 6 X 3 = 18 trials for each AS), thus excluding the first day and also the last day since there is evidence that atypical performance may occur as a terminal effect. It was necessary to estimate the mean decrement per trial for each S to allow comparisons between the three times of day. For this purpose, the error scores for each S were plotted and straight lines fitted graphically. Column 3 in Table 1 shows the slopes of the lines, or, the mean decrement of error scores over 18 trials. Ss 2 and 3 show a slight mean increment.The results in Column 4 are after equating the 3 times of day for decrement. They show that learning efficiency is lowest at 8:30 a.m., that the most efficient time is a t 6:OO p.m. and that 1:00 p.m. is about, but not quite, as efficient as 6:OO p.m. The mean number of errors as a percentage of errors at 8:30 a.m. for the group of Ss was 86% at 1 p.m. and 84% at 6:OO p.m. Only 2 Ss did not conform to this general rule in having lower error scores at 8 :30 than at 1 :00 p.m. I n addition 3 Ss had lower scores at 8:30 a.m. than at 6:OO p.m. Overall, however, only one S out of the 12 showed highest efficiency in the morning. Three out of the 12 Ss showed 38y0 or more decrease in errors at 6:OO p.m. as compared with 8:30 a.m.For clinical purposes, a demonstration of the existe...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.