Literature DB >> 20025400

On the relation of mean reaction time and intraindividual reaction time variability.

Florian Schmiedek1, Martin Lövdén, Ulman Lindenberger.   

Abstract

Researchers often statistically control for means when examining individual or age-associated differences in variances, assuming that the relation between the 2 is linear and invariant within and across individuals and age groups. We tested this assumption in the domain of working memory by applying variance-heterogeneity multilevel models to reaction times in the n-back task. Data are from the COGITO study, which comprises 101 younger and 103 older adults assessed in over 100 daily sessions. We found that relations between means and variances vary reliably across age groups and individuals, thereby contradicting the invariant linearity assumption. We argue that statistical control approaches need to be replaced by theoretical models that simultaneously estimate central tendency and dispersion of latencies and accuracies and illustrate this claim by applying the diffusion model to the same data. Finally, we note that differences in reliability between estimates for means and variances need to be considered when comparing their unique contributions to developmental outcomes. PsycINFO Database Record Copyright (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20025400     DOI: 10.1037/a0017799

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Aging        ISSN: 0882-7974


  41 in total

1.  A Monte Carlo simulation study of the reliability of intraindividual variability.

Authors:  Ryne Estabrook; Kevin J Grimm; Ryan P Bowles
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2012-01-23

2.  Mental chronometry and individual differences: modeling reliabilities and correlations of reaction time means and effect sizes.

Authors:  Jeff Miller; Rolf Ulrich
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-10

3.  Are neurocognitive speed and inconsistency similarly affected in type 2 diabetes?

Authors:  Bonnie P Whitehead; Roger A Dixon; David F Hultsch; Stuart W S MacDonald
Journal:  J Clin Exp Neuropsychol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.475

4.  The importance of being variable.

Authors:  Douglas D Garrett; Natasa Kovacevic; Anthony R McIntosh; Cheryl L Grady
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Time-structured and net intraindividual variability: tools for examining the development of dynamic characteristics and processes.

Authors:  Nilam Ram; Denis Gerstorf
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2009-12

6.  Psychometric properties of within-person across-session variability in accuracy of cognitive performance.

Authors:  Timothy A Salthouse
Journal:  Assessment       Date:  2012-03-02

7.  Intraindividual variability in HIV infection: evidence for greater neurocognitive dispersion in older HIV seropositive adults.

Authors:  Erin E Morgan; Steven Paul Woods; Lisa Delano-Wood; Mark W Bondi; Igor Grant
Journal:  Neuropsychology       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Longitudinal Assessment Design and Statistical Power for Detecting an Intervention Impact.

Authors:  Hanno Petras
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2016-10

9.  Integrating impairments in reaction time and executive function using a diffusion model framework.

Authors:  Sarah L Karalunas; Cynthia L Huang-Pollock
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  2013-07

10.  Does variability in cognitive performance correlate with frontal brain volume?

Authors:  Martin Lövdén; Florian Schmiedek; Kristen M Kennedy; Karen M Rodrigue; Ulman Lindenberger; Naftali Raz
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.