Psychology, Cognitive Psychology Unit and University Research Priority Program "Dynamics of Healthy Aging", University of Zurich.
Department of Psychology.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2019 Aug;148(8):1335-1372. doi: 10.1037/xge0000593. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
In the last two decades, individual-differences research has put forward 3 cognitive psychometric constructs: executive control (i.e., the ability to monitor and control ongoing thoughts and actions), working memory capacity (WMC, i.e., the ability to retain access to a limited amount of information in the service of complex tasks), and fluid intelligence (gF, i.e., the ability to reason with novel information). These constructs have been proposed to be closely related, but previous research failed to substantiate a strong correlation between executive control and the other two constructs. This might arise from the difficulty in establishing executive control as a latent variable and from differences in the way the 3 constructs are measured (i.e., executive control is typically measured through reaction times, whereas WMC and gF are measured through accuracy). The purpose of the present study was to overcome these difficulties by measuring executive control through accuracy. Despite good reliabilities of all measures, structural equation modeling identified no coherent factor of executive control. Furthermore, WMC and gF-modeled as distinct but correlated factors-were unrelated to the individual measures of executive control. Hence, measuring executive control through accuracy did not overcome the difficulties of establishing executive control as a latent variable. These findings call into question the existence of executive control as a psychometric construct and the assumption that WMC and gF are closely related to the ability to control ongoing thoughts and actions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
在过去的二十年中,个体差异研究提出了 3 种认知心理计量学结构:执行控制(即监测和控制正在进行的思维和行动的能力)、工作记忆容量(WMC,即保留有限数量的信息以服务于复杂任务的能力)和流体智力(gF,即运用新信息进行推理的能力)。这些结构被认为是密切相关的,但以前的研究未能证实执行控制与其他两种结构之间存在很强的相关性。这可能是由于难以将执行控制确立为潜在变量,以及这 3 种结构的测量方式存在差异(即执行控制通常通过反应时间来测量,而 WMC 和 gF 通过准确性来测量)。本研究的目的是通过准确性来测量执行控制,从而克服这些困难。尽管所有测量的信度都很好,但结构方程模型没有识别出执行控制的一致因素。此外,作为不同但相关因素建模的 WMC 和 gF 与执行控制的个体测量无关。因此,通过准确性来测量执行控制并没有克服将执行控制确立为潜在变量的困难。这些发现对执行控制作为心理计量学结构的存在以及 WMC 和 gF 与控制正在进行的思维和行动的能力密切相关的假设提出了质疑。(PsycINFO 数据库记录(c)2019 APA,保留所有权利)。