Jendryczko David, Scharfen Jana, Holling Heinz
Institute of Psychology, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, 48149 Münster, Germany.
J Intell. 2019 Sep 23;7(4):22. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence7040022.
When a cognitive ability is assessed repeatedly, test scores and ability estimates are often observed to increase across test sessions. This phenomenon is known as the retest (or practice) effect. One explanation for retest effects is that situational test anxiety interferes with a testee's performance during earlier test sessions, thereby creating systematic measurement bias on the test items (interference hypothesis). Yet, the influence of anxiety diminishes with test repetitions. This explanation is controversial, since the presence of measurement bias during earlier measurement occasions cannot always be confirmed. It is argued that people from the lower end of the ability spectrum become aware of their deficits in test situations and therefore report higher anxiety (deficit hypothesis). In 2014, a structural equation model was proposed that specifically allows the comparison of these two hypotheses with regard to explanatory power for the negative anxiety-ability correlation found in cross-sectional assessments. We extended this model for usage in longitudinal studies to investigate the impact of test anxiety on test performance and on retest effects. A latent neighbor-change growth curve was implemented into the model that enables an estimation of retest effects between all pairs of successive test sessions. Systematic restrictions on model parameters allow testing the hypothetical reduction in anxiety interference over the test sessions, which can be compared to retest effect sizes. In an empirical study with seven measurement occasions, we found that a substantial reduction in interference upon the second test session was associated with the largest retest effect in a figural matrices test, which served as a proxy measure for general intelligence. However, smaller retest effects occurred up to the fourth test administration, whereas evidence for anxiety-induced measurement bias was only produced for the first two test sessions. Anxiety and ability were not negatively correlated at any time when the interference effects were controlled for. Implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research are discussed.
当反复评估一种认知能力时,通常会观察到测试分数和能力估计值在各测试环节中有所增加。这种现象被称为重测(或练习)效应。重测效应的一种解释是,情境性测试焦虑会在早期测试环节干扰受测者的表现,从而在测试项目上产生系统性测量偏差(干扰假说)。然而,焦虑的影响会随着测试重复次数而减弱。这种解释存在争议,因为早期测量场合中测量偏差的存在并非总能得到证实。有人认为,能力范围较低端的人在测试情境中意识到自己的不足,因此报告的焦虑程度更高(缺陷假说)。2014年,有人提出了一个结构方程模型,该模型特别允许就横断面评估中发现的负性焦虑 - 能力相关性的解释力,对这两种假说进行比较。我们将此模型扩展用于纵向研究,以调查测试焦虑对测试表现和重测效应的影响。在模型中实施了一个潜在的相邻变化增长曲线,它能够估计所有连续测试环节对之间的重测效应。对模型参数的系统性限制允许测试假设的测试环节中焦虑干扰的减少情况,并可与重测效应大小进行比较。在一项有七个测量场合的实证研究中,我们发现,在一个作为一般智力替代指标的图形矩阵测试中,第二次测试环节干扰的大幅减少与最大的重测效应相关。然而,直到第四次测试施测时,重测效应都较小,而焦虑导致的测量偏差证据仅在前两次测试环节中出现。当控制干扰效应时,焦虑和能力在任何时候都没有负相关。文中讨论了研究的意义、局限性以及对未来研究的建议。