Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol ; : 1-10, 2024 May 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38753819

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Arranging Pictures is a new episodic memory test based on the NIH Toolbox (NIHTB) Picture Sequence Memory measure and optimized for self-administration on a personal smartphone within the Mobile Toolbox (MTB). We describe evidence from three distinct validation studies. METHOD: In Study 1, 92 participants self-administered Arranging Pictures on study-provided smartphones in the lab and were administered external measures of similar and dissimilar constructs by trained examiners to assess validity under controlled circumstances. In Study 2, 1,021 participants completed the external measures in the lab and self-administered Arranging Pictures remotely on their personal smartphones to assess validity in real-world contexts. In Study 3, 141 participants self-administered Arranging Pictures remotely twice with a two-week delay on personal iOS smartphones to assess test-retest reliability and practice effects. RESULTS: Internal consistency was good across samples (ρxx = .80 to .85, p < .001). Test-retest reliability was marginal (ICC = .49, p < .001) and there were significant practice effects after a two-week delay (ΔM = 3.21 (95% CI [2.56, 3.88]). As expected, correlations with convergent measures were significant and moderate to large in magnitude (ρ = .44 to .76, p < .001), while correlations with discriminant measures were small (ρ = .23 to .27, p < .05) or nonsignificant. Scores demonstrated significant negative correlations with age (ρ = -.32 to -.21, p < .001). Mean performance was slightly higher in the iOS compared to the Android group (MiOS = 18.80, NiOS = 635; MAndroid = 17.11, NAndroid = 386; t(757.73) = 4.17, p < .001), but device type did not significantly influence the psychometric properties of the measure. Indicators of potential cheating were mixed; average scores were significantly higher in the remote samples (F(2, 850) = 11.415, p < .001), but there were not significantly more perfect scores. CONCLUSION: The MTB Arranging Pictures measure demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity when self-administered on personal device. Future research should examine the potential for cheating in remote settings and the properties of the measure in clinical samples.

2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38414411

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: We describe the development of a new computer adaptive vocabulary test, Mobile Toolbox (MTB) Word Meaning, and validity evidence from 3 studies. METHOD: Word Meaning was designed to be a multiple-choice synonym test optimized for self-administration on a personal smartphone. The items were first calibrated online in a sample of 7,525 participants to create the computer-adaptive test algorithm for the Word Meaning measure within the MTB app. In Study 1, 92 participants self-administered Word Meaning on study-provided smartphones in the lab and were administered external measures by trained examiners. In Study 2, 1,021 participants completed the external measures in the lab and Word Meaning was self-administered remotely on their personal smartphones. In Study 3, 141 participants self-administered Word Meaning remotely twice with a 2-week delay on personal iPhones. RESULTS: The final bank included 1363 items. Internal consistency was adequate to good across samples (ρxx = 0.78 to 0.81, p < .001). Test-retest reliability was good (ICC = 0.65, p < .001), and the mean theta score was not significantly different upon the second administration. Correlations were moderate to large with measures of similar constructs (ρ = 0.67-0.75, p < .001) and non-significant with measures of dissimilar constructs. Scores demonstrated small to moderate correlations with age (ρ = 0.35 to 0.45, p < .001) and education (ρ = 0.26, p < .001). CONCLUSION: The MTB Word Meaning measure demonstrated evidence of reliability and validity in three samples. Further validation studies in clinical samples are necessary.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA