EXPRESS: Adaptive Assessment of the Capacity of Cognitive Control

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182110308
Author(s):  
Xu He ◽  
Boyu Qiu ◽  
Yingyu Deng ◽  
Ting Liu ◽  
Yanrong Chen ◽  
...  

Cognitive control, although it has limited capacity, serves an essential role in supporting a broad range of cognitive functions. The backward masking majority function task (MFT-M) is a commonly used and validated behavioral method for measuring the capacity of cognitive control (CCC), but the administration is lengthy. We tested the relative efficiency of administering the MFT-M using an adaptive method based on the principles of computerized adaptive testing (CAT). Participants were 40 healthy young adults aged 18-26. Scores on the adaptive version were highly correlated with scores based on the original approach to administration and showed high test-retest reliability. In addition, the original 864 trials were reduced to 216, and administration time was reduced from 86 minutes to less than 20 minutes. The results suggest that computerized adaptive testing is a valid and more efficient method for assessing CCC than the MFT-M. This study provides an example of adaptive trial selection in task administration, an approach that can advance the methodology of behavioral science.

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S19-S19
Author(s):  
Daniel Guinart ◽  
Renato de Filippis ◽  
Stella Rosson ◽  
Lara Prizgint ◽  
Bhagyashree Patil ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Time constraints limit the use of measurement-based approaches in the routine clinical management of schizophrenia. Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) uses computational algorithms (item response theory - IRT) to match individual subjects with only the most relevant questions for them, reducing administration time and increasing measurement efficiency and scalability. This study aimed to test the psychometric properties of the newly developed CAT-Psychosis battery, both self-administered and rater-administered versions. Methods Patients rated themselves with the self-administered CAT-Psychosis which yields a current psychotic severity score. The CAT-Psychosis is based on a multidimensional extension of traditional IRT-based CAT that is suitable for complex traits and disorders such as psychosis. Two different raters independently conducted the rater-administered CAT-Psychosis to test inter-rater reliability (IRR). The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) was administered to test convergent validity. Subjects were re-tested within 7 days to assess test-retest reliability. Generalized linear mixed models and Pearson product moment correlation coefficients were used to test for correlations between individual ratings and average CAT-Psychosis severity scores respectively and the BPRS. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to test for reliability. Generalized linear and non-linear (logistic) mixed models were used to estimate diagnostic discrimination capacity (lifetime ratings) and to estimate diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC curve with 10-fold cross validation. Results 135 subjects with psychosis and 25 healthy controls were included in the study. Mean age of the sample was 33.1 years, standard deviation (SD)=12.2years; 62% were males. No significant differences were detected between groups (p=0.9064 and p=0.2684 respectively). Mean length of assessment was 7 minutes and 9 seconds (SD: 5:04min) for the clinician-administered version and 1 minute and 49 seconds (SD: 1:35min) for the self-administered version, averaging 11.4 and 12.6 questions each. Convergent validity against BPRS was moderate for both rater-administered (r=0.65 (0.55–0.73); Marginal Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MMLE)=0.052, Standard Error (SE)=0.005, p<0.00001) and self-administered (r=0.66; MMLE=0.057, SE=0.005, p<0.00001) versions. Clinician version’s IRR was strong (ICC=0.67 (Confidence Interval (CI): 0.51–0.80)), and test-retest reliability was strong for both self-report (ICC=0.83 (CI: 0.76–0.87) and clinician (ICC=0.87 (CI: 0.75–0.94) version. The CAT-Psychosis clinician version was able to discriminate psychosis vs. healthy controls (Area Under the ROC Curve (AUC)=0.96 (CI: 0.90–0.97)). CAT-Psychosis self-report yielded similar results (AUC= 0.85 (CI: 0.77–0.88)). Discussion CAT-Psychosis provides valid severity ratings that mirror BPRS total scores, even as a self-report, yielding a dramatic reduction in administration time, while maintaining reliable psychometric properties. Furthermore, CAT-Psychosis, both clinician and self-report versions, is able to reliably discriminate psychotic patients based on a lifetime diagnosis from healthy controls after a brief assessment of current symptomatology.


1999 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lutz F. Hornke

Summary: Item parameters for several hundreds of items were estimated based on empirical data from several thousands of subjects. The logistic one-parameter (1PL) and two-parameter (2PL) model estimates were evaluated. However, model fit showed that only a subset of items complied sufficiently, so that the remaining ones were assembled in well-fitting item banks. In several simulation studies 5000 simulated responses were generated in accordance with a computerized adaptive test procedure along with person parameters. A general reliability of .80 or a standard error of measurement of .44 was used as a stopping rule to end CAT testing. We also recorded how often each item was used by all simulees. Person-parameter estimates based on CAT correlated higher than .90 with true values simulated. For all 1PL fitting item banks most simulees used more than 20 items but less than 30 items to reach the pre-set level of measurement error. However, testing based on item banks that complied to the 2PL revealed that, on average, only 10 items were sufficient to end testing at the same measurement error level. Both clearly demonstrate the precision and economy of computerized adaptive testing. Empirical evaluations from everyday uses will show whether these trends will hold up in practice. If so, CAT will become possible and reasonable with some 150 well-calibrated 2PL items.


Methodology ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Ramon Barrada ◽  
Julio Olea ◽  
Vicente Ponsoda

Abstract. The Sympson-Hetter (1985) method provides a means of controlling maximum exposure rate of items in Computerized Adaptive Testing. Through a series of simulations, control parameters are set that mark the probability of administration of an item on being selected. This method presents two main problems: it requires a long computation time for calculating the parameters and the maximum exposure rate is slightly above the fixed limit. Van der Linden (2003) presented two alternatives which appear to solve both of the problems. The impact of these methods in the measurement accuracy has not been tested yet. We show how these methods over-restrict the exposure of some highly discriminating items and, thus, the accuracy is decreased. It also shown that, when the desired maximum exposure rate is near the minimum possible value, these methods offer an empirical maximum exposure rate clearly above the goal. A new method, based on the initial estimation of the probability of administration and the probability of selection of the items with the restricted method ( Revuelta & Ponsoda, 1998 ), is presented in this paper. It can be used with the Sympson-Hetter method and with the two van der Linden's methods. This option, when used with Sympson-Hetter, speeds the convergence of the control parameters without decreasing the accuracy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document