On doing multi-act arithmetic: A multitrait-multimethod approach of performance dimensions in integrated multitasking

Abstract

Here we present a systematic plan to the experimental study of test–retest reliability in the multitasking domain, adopting the multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) approach to evaluate the psychometric properties of performance in Düker-type speeded multiple-act mental arithmetic. These form of tasks capacitate the experimental analysis of integrated multi-step processing by combining multiple mental operations in flexible ways in the service of the overarching goal of completing the task. A particular focus was on scoring methodology, particularly measures of response speed variability. To this end, we present data of two experiments with regard to (a) test–retest reliability, (b) between-measures correlational structure, (c) and stability (test–retest practice effects). Finally, we compared participants with high versus low performance variability to assess ability-related differences in measurement precision (typically used as proxy to “simulate” patient populations), which is especially relevant in the applied fields of clinical neuropsychology. The participants performed two classic integrated multi-act arithmetic tasks, combining addition and verification (Exp. 1) and addition and comparison (Exp. 2). The results revealed excellent test–retest reliability for the standard and the variability measures. The analysis of between-measures correlational structure revealed the typical pattern of convergent and discriminant relationships, and also, that absolute response speed variability was highly correlated with average speed (r > 0.85), indicating that these measures mainly deliver redundant information. In contrast, speed-adjusted (relativized) variability revealed discriminant validity being correlated to a much lesser degree with average speed, indicating that this measure delivers additional information not already provided by the speed measure. Furthermore, speed-adjusted variability was virtually unaffected by test–retest practice, which makes this measure interesting in situations with repeated testing.

Hope for success as a mediator between Big Five personality traits and achievement goal orientation among high performance and recreational athletes

“…In the first step, we carried out an analysis of descriptive statistics and examined indicators related to the shape of the distribution: skewness and kurtosis. Next, we computed r-Pearson correlations between the investigated variables in order to check the relationship and convergence between the examined constructs [ 51 ].…”

Evaluation of the reliability and validity of computerized tests of attention

“…to check for aberrant behavior); and that variability scores should not be used at all [9]. However, it is often assumed that RT and errors are equipotent measures in psychometric assessments [43], despite the reported lack of reliability for error scores ( [42], but see [44]. If one considers that the error scores are important in an assessment, a combination of RT and error scores is recommended to be used in the analysis [45][46][47], besides demonstrated psychometric properties.…”

Development and validation of the Chinese coaches’ interpersonal style scale

“…We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the CCISS to determine the suitability of the three-dimensional division based on Schumann’s seven-point guide ( Schumann et al, 2022 ).…”