Citation

Tyburski E, Kerestey M, Kerestey P, Radoń S, Mueller ST. Brain Sci. 2021; 11(11).

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, Switzerland Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI) AG)

DOI

10.3390/brainsci11111420

PMID

34827419

Abstract

In two studies, we examine the test-retest reliability and factor structure of the computerized Tower of London (TOL) and Go/No Go (GNG). Before analyses, raw results of variables that were not normally distributed were transformed. Study 1 examined the reliability of a broad spectrum of indicators (Initial Time Thinking, ITT; Execution Time, ET; Full Time, FT; Extra Moves, EM; No Go Errors, NGE; Reaction Time for Go Responses, RTGR) across an eight-week delay in a sample of 20 young adults. After correction for multiple comparisons and correlations, our results demonstrate that the tasks have ambiguous test-retest reliability coefficients (non-significant r for all indicators, and interclass correlation (ICC) for TOL; significant ICC for GNG; show lack of reliable change over time for all indicators in both tasks); moreover, ITT exhibits strong practice effects. Study 2 investigated both tasks' factor structure and conducted a more detailed analysis of indicators for each trial (ITT, ET, EM) in the TOL task in the group of 95 young adults.

RESULTS reveal a satisfactory 2-factor solution, with the first factor (planning inhibition) defined by ITT, NGE, and RTGR, and the second factor (move efficiency) defined by EM and ET. The detailed analysis identified a 6-factor solution with the first factor defined by ITT for more difficult trials and the remaining five factors defined by EM and ET for each trial, reflecting move efficiency for each trial separately.

Language: en

Keywords

factor structure; Go/No Go task; motor inhibition; motor planning; Psychology Experiment Building Language; test-retest reliability; Tower of London