Suppr超能文献

一分之差定胜负?比较 30 种 Hearts and Flowers 评分方法的预测和同时效度。

One Score to Rule Them All? Comparing the Predictive and Concurrent Validity of 30 Hearts and Flowers Scoring Approaches.

机构信息

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.

MDRC, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

Assessment. 2024 Dec;31(8):1702-1720. doi: 10.1177/10731911241229566. Epub 2024 Feb 15.

Abstract

The Hearts and Flowers (H&F) task is a computerized executive functioning (EF) assessment that has been used to measure EF from early childhood to adulthood. It provides data on accuracy and reaction time (RT) across three different task blocks (hearts, flowers, and mixed). However, there is a lack of consensus in the field on how to score the task that makes it difficult to interpret findings across studies. The current study, which includes a demographically diverse population of kindergarteners from Boston Public Schools ( = 946), compares the predictive and concurrent validity of 30 ways of scoring H&F, each with a different combination of accuracy, RT, and task block(s). Our exploratory results provide evidence supporting the use of a score based on Zelazo et al.'s approach of adding accuracy and RT scores together only after individuals pass a certain accuracy threshold. Findings have implications for scoring future tablet-based developmental assessments.

摘要

Hearts and Flowers (H&F) 任务是一种计算机执行功能 (EF) 评估,用于从儿童早期到成年期测量 EF。它提供了三个不同任务块(心脏、花朵和混合)的准确性和反应时间 (RT) 的数据。然而,该领域缺乏对如何评分的共识,这使得很难在研究之间解释发现。本研究包括来自波士顿公立学校的具有不同人口统计学特征的幼儿园儿童(n=946),比较了 30 种 H&F 评分方法的预测和并发有效性,每种方法都有不同的准确性、RT 和任务块的组合。我们的探索性结果提供了证据支持使用 Zelazo 等人的方法,即在个体通过一定的准确性阈值后,仅将准确性和 RT 得分相加得出一个分数。研究结果对未来基于平板电脑的发展评估的评分具有影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验