Department of Psychology, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, USA.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2019 Oct 24;34(7):1175-1191. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acz016.
This study examined the test-retest reliability and construct validity of the Action Fluency Test (AFT) as a measure of executive functioning.
Using a correlational design, 128 healthy college students (M Age = 19.24, SD = 2.01; M education = 13.29 years, SD = 0.81) completed the AFT, and measures of verbal and figural fluency, executive functioning and other relevant constructs (e.g., vocabulary, working memory, and attention).
Coefficients of stability were acceptable for AFT correct words (r = .76; p < .01), but not for errors (r = .41) or perseverations (r = .14). No practice effects were observed upon repeat testing (M interval = 39.21 days). Divergent validity evidence was mixed. AFT scores were unrelated to working memory and perceptual-reasoning abilities; however, correlations with vocabulary (r = .32; p < .01) and information-processing speed (r = .30; p < .01) were greater than associations between AFT scores and executive measures. Regarding convergent validity, AFT scores correlated with other fluency tasks (r = .4 range), but correlations with measures of executive functioning were absent or small. Action and letter fluency correlated with measures of attentional control and inhibition; however, these associations were no longer significant after controlling for shared variance with information-processing speed.
Findings are consistent with previous research suggesting vocabulary and information-processing speed underlie effective fluency performance to a greater extent than executive functioning. The AFT measures unique variance not accounted for by semantic and letter fluency tasks, and therefore may be used for a variety of research and clinical purposes.
本研究旨在检验动作流畅性测验（AFT）作为执行功能测量工具的重测信度和结构效度。
采用相关设计，128 名健康大学生（平均年龄=19.24 岁，标准差=2.01；平均受教育年限=13.29 年，标准差=0.81）完成了 AFT 以及言语流畅性和图形流畅性、执行功能和其他相关结构（如词汇、工作记忆和注意力）的测量。
AFT 正确单词的稳定性系数可接受（r=.76；p <.01），但错误（r=.41）和持续错误（r=.14）的系数不可接受。重复测试未观察到练习效应（平均间隔=39.21 天）。发散效度证据不一致。AFT 评分与工作记忆和知觉推理能力无关；然而，与词汇量（r=.32；p <.01）和信息处理速度（r=.30；p <.01）的相关性大于 AFT 评分与执行措施之间的相关性。关于会聚效度，AFT 评分与其他流畅性任务相关（r=.4 范围），但与执行功能测量值的相关性缺失或较小。动作和字母流畅性与注意力控制和抑制的测量值相关；然而，在控制信息处理速度的共同方差后，这些关联不再显著。
研究结果与先前的研究一致，表明词汇量和信息处理速度对有效流畅性表现的影响比执行功能更大。AFT 测量了语义和字母流畅性任务无法解释的独特方差，因此可用于各种研究和临床目的。
