Investigating retest effects in cognitive ability tests: An operation-specific approach

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Intelligence Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-12 DOI:10.1016/j.intell.2025.101988
Vanessa S. Pallentin , Jan Rummel , Daniel Danner
{"title":"Investigating retest effects in cognitive ability tests: An operation-specific approach","authors":"Vanessa S. Pallentin ,&nbsp;Jan Rummel ,&nbsp;Daniel Danner","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101988","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The term “retest effects” refers to score gains on cognitive ability as well as educational achievement tests upon repeated administration of the same or a similar test. Previous research on this phenomenon has focused mainly on general cognitive ability scores—often using manifest difference scores—and has neglected differences in retest effects across different types of cognitive operations underlying general cognitive abilities. Additionally, these studies have focused primarily on average group-level test scores, neglecting interindividual differences in retest effects. To address these gaps, we used latent growth curve modeling to examine retest effects in <em>N</em> = 203 participants across three test sessions, considering both general cognitive ability and its four underlying operations according to the Berlin intelligence structure model, namely, processing capacity, processing speed, creativity, and memory. Results show a linear improvement in overall performance of 53.60 points (about 10.45 IQ points) with each assessment, corresponding to two thirds of a standard deviation. Participants' slopes—that is, their rates of improvement across test sessions—did not vary significantly, and thus did not correlate with their initial cognitive ability levels. Statistically significant operation-specific differences in the magnitude of retest effects were found, with memory showing the largest retest effect and creativity the smallest. Although participants did not vary in their rates of improvement on the processing-capacity and memory operation, there was significant interindividual variation in the slopes of the other two operations. These findings highlight the importance of considering operation-specific scores in research on retest effects. Implications for cognitive ability retesting practices are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 101988"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000911","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The term “retest effects” refers to score gains on cognitive ability as well as educational achievement tests upon repeated administration of the same or a similar test. Previous research on this phenomenon has focused mainly on general cognitive ability scores—often using manifest difference scores—and has neglected differences in retest effects across different types of cognitive operations underlying general cognitive abilities. Additionally, these studies have focused primarily on average group-level test scores, neglecting interindividual differences in retest effects. To address these gaps, we used latent growth curve modeling to examine retest effects in N = 203 participants across three test sessions, considering both general cognitive ability and its four underlying operations according to the Berlin intelligence structure model, namely, processing capacity, processing speed, creativity, and memory. Results show a linear improvement in overall performance of 53.60 points (about 10.45 IQ points) with each assessment, corresponding to two thirds of a standard deviation. Participants' slopes—that is, their rates of improvement across test sessions—did not vary significantly, and thus did not correlate with their initial cognitive ability levels. Statistically significant operation-specific differences in the magnitude of retest effects were found, with memory showing the largest retest effect and creativity the smallest. Although participants did not vary in their rates of improvement on the processing-capacity and memory operation, there was significant interindividual variation in the slopes of the other two operations. These findings highlight the importance of considering operation-specific scores in research on retest effects. Implications for cognitive ability retesting practices are discussed.
研究认知能力测试中的重测效果:一种特定手术方法
“复试效应”是指在重复参加相同或类似的测试后,认知能力和教育成就测试的分数有所提高。以往对这一现象的研究主要集中在一般认知能力得分上——通常使用明显差异得分——而忽略了在一般认知能力基础上不同类型认知操作的重测效果的差异。此外,这些研究主要集中在平均组水平的测试成绩,忽视了重测效果的个体间差异。为了解决这些差距,我们使用潜在增长曲线模型来检验N = 203名参与者在三个测试阶段的重测效果,根据柏林智力结构模型,考虑一般认知能力及其四种基本操作,即处理能力、处理速度、创造力和记忆力。结果显示,每次评估后,学生的整体表现线性提高53.60分(约10.45智商分),相当于三分之二的标准差。参与者的斜率——即他们在测试过程中的进步速度——没有显著变化,因此与他们最初的认知能力水平无关。在重测效应的大小上发现了统计学上显著的操作特异性差异,记忆表现出最大的重测效应,创造力最小。虽然参与者在处理能力和记忆操作上的改善率没有变化,但在其他两项操作的斜率上存在显著的个体差异。这些发现强调了在重测效果研究中考虑手术特异性评分的重要性。讨论了认知能力重测实践的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intelligence
Intelligence PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
64
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: This unique journal in psychology is devoted to publishing original research and theoretical studies and review papers that substantially contribute to the understanding of intelligence. It provides a new source of significant papers in psychometrics, tests and measurement, and all other empirical and theoretical studies in intelligence and mental retardation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书