Evaluating practice effects across learning trials – ceiling effects or something more?
Saved in:
| Title: | Evaluating practice effects across learning trials – ceiling effects or something more? |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Hammers, Dustin B. (AUTHOR), Bothra, Shreya (AUTHOR), Polsinelli, Angelina (AUTHOR), Apostolova, Liana G. (AUTHOR), Duff, Kevin (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology. Sep2024, Vol. 46 Issue 7, p630-643. 14p. |
| Subjects: | Memory testing, Materials testing, Neuropsychology, Ceilings |
| Abstract: | Background: Practice effects (PE) are traditionally considered improvements in performance observed resulting from repeated exposure to test materials across multiple testing sessions. While PE are commonly observed for memory tests, this effect has only been considered in summary total scores. The current objective was to consider PE in summary total scores, individual learning trials, and learning slopes. Method: One-week PE for individual trial and learning slope performance was examined on the BVMT-R and HVLT-R in 151 cognitively intact participants and 131 participants with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) aged 65 years and older. Results: One-week PE were observed across all trials and summary total scores for both memory measures and diagnostic classifications, despite the potential for ceiling effects to limit improvement on retesting. PE were largest on the first trial relative to subsequent learning trials. This effect was diminished – but not eliminated – in participants with MCI. Conversely, no PE were observed for learning slope scores, which was counter to expectations and likely confounded by ceiling effects. Conclusions: PE were present across learning trials but not learning slopes, and the initial learning trial at follow-up tended to benefit most from PE relative to subsequent learning trials. Ceiling effects appeared to influence PE for learning slopes more than learning trials. These results highlight the potential diagnostic utility of PE across individual learning trials and inform how they are distributed at follow-up, while also suggesting that learning slopes may be generally stable during longitudinal assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Background: Practice effects (PE) are traditionally considered improvements in performance observed resulting from repeated exposure to test materials across multiple testing sessions. While PE are commonly observed for memory tests, this effect has only been considered in summary total scores. The current objective was to consider PE in summary total scores, individual learning trials, and learning slopes. Method: One-week PE for individual trial and learning slope performance was examined on the BVMT-R and HVLT-R in 151 cognitively intact participants and 131 participants with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) aged 65 years and older. Results: One-week PE were observed across all trials and summary total scores for both memory measures and diagnostic classifications, despite the potential for ceiling effects to limit improvement on retesting. PE were largest on the first trial relative to subsequent learning trials. This effect was diminished – but not eliminated – in participants with MCI. Conversely, no PE were observed for learning slope scores, which was counter to expectations and likely confounded by ceiling effects. Conclusions: PE were present across learning trials but not learning slopes, and the initial learning trial at follow-up tended to benefit most from PE relative to subsequent learning trials. Ceiling effects appeared to influence PE for learning slopes more than learning trials. These results highlight the potential diagnostic utility of PE across individual learning trials and inform how they are distributed at follow-up, while also suggesting that learning slopes may be generally stable during longitudinal assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 13803395 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/13803395.2024.2400107 |
