Literature DB >> 28406669

Methodology of performance scoring in the d2 sustained-attention test: Cumulative-reliability functions and practical guidelines.

Michael B Steinborn1, Robert Langner2, Hagen C Flehmig3, Lynn Huestegge1.   

Abstract

We provide a psychometric analysis of commonly used performance indices of the d2 sustained-attention test, and give methodical guidelines and recommendations, based on this research. We examined experimental effects of repeated testing on performance speed and accuracy (omission and commission errors), and further evaluated aspects of test reliability by means of cumulative reliability function (CRF) analysis. These aspects were also examined for a number of alternative (yet commonly used) scoring techniques and valuation methods. Results indicate that performance is sensitive to change, both differentially within (time-on-task) and between (test-retest) sessions. These effects did not severely affect test reliability, since perfect score reliability was observed for measures of speed (and was even preserved with half the test length) while variability and error scores were more problematic with respect to reliability. Notably, limitations particularly hold for commission but less so for omission errors. Our recommendations to researchers and practitioners are that (a) only the speed score (and error-corrected speed score) is eligible for highly reliable assessment, that (b) error scores might be used as a secondary measure (e.g., to check for aberrant behavior), that (c) variability scores might not be used at all. Given the exceptional reliability of performance speed, and (d) test length may be reduced up to 50%, if necessary for time-economic reasons, to serve purposes of population screening and field assessment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28406669     DOI: 10.1037/pas0000482

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Assess        ISSN: 1040-3590


  34 in total

1.  Go-stimuli probability influences response bias in the sustained attention to response task: a signal detection theory perspective.

Authors:  Aman Bedi; Paul N Russell; William S Helton
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2022-04-11

2.  Clinical Correlates of Measured and Predicted Resting Energy Expenditure in Patients with Anorexia Nervosa: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Rami Bou Khalil; Ariane Sultan; Maude Seneque; Sami Richa; Patrick Lefebvre; Eric Renard; Philippe Courtet; Laurent Maimoun; Sebastien Guillaume
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 6.706

3.  The effects of real-time performance feedback and performance emphasis on the sustained attention to response task (SART).

Authors:  Justin M Mensen; Jasmine S Dang; Andrew J Stets; William S Helton
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-10-08

4.  Effect of Vergence/Accommodative Therapy on Attention in Children with Convergence Insufficiency: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors: 
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 1.973

5.  Restoration of Attention by Rest in a Multitasking World: Theory, Methodology, and Empirical Evidence.

Authors:  Frank Schumann; Michael B Steinborn; Jens Kürten; Liyu Cao; Barbara Friederike Händel; Lynn Huestegge
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-04-01

6.  Reducing the time needed to administer a sustained attention test in patients with stroke.

Authors:  Gong-Hong Lin; Ying-Pi Yang; Jeng-Feng Yang; Tzu-Ting Chen; Ching-Lin Hsieh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Phone Conversation while Processing Information: Chronometric Analysis of Load Effects in Everyday-media Multitasking.

Authors:  Michael B Steinborn; Lynn Huestegge
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-06-06

8.  Knowledge of Previous Tasks: Task Similarity Influences Bias in Task Duration Predictions.

Authors:  Kevin E Thomas; Cornelius J König
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-05-24

9.  Reliability, validation and norms of the Chinese version of Anxiety Sensitivity Index 3 in a sample of military personnel.

Authors:  Wenpeng Cai; Wei Dong; Yu Pan; Cun Wei; Shuimiao Zhang; Bin Tian; Jin Yan; Guanghui Deng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Hearing own or other's name has different effects on monotonous task performance.

Authors:  Kosuke Kaida; Sunao Iwaki
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.