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.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
