跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.211.117.197) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/05/22 01:21
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:鄭幼毅
研究生(外文):Yu Yi Chen
論文名稱:利用差異引擎典範預測電腦與紙筆速度測驗之表現 -以一台灣樣本為例
論文名稱(外文):Using Difference Engine Model to Predict the Performance of Computerized and Paper-and-Pencil Speed Tests in a Taiwanese Sample
指導教授:何孟洋何孟洋引用關係
指導教授(外文):M. Y. Ho
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:長庚大學
系所名稱:職能治療學系
學門:醫藥衛生學門
學類:復健醫學學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2019
畢業學年度:107
語文別:英文
論文頁數:100
中文關鍵詞:處理速度差異引擎典範訊息處理反應時間老化
外文關鍵詞:Processing SpeedDifference Engine ModelInformation ProcessingReaction TimeAging
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:204
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
緒論:Myerson等人(2003) 提出差異引擎典範(DEM)試圖解釋在不同向度的速度測驗表現可由單一速度因素的現象。Tsai (2015)使用一台灣樣本驗證差異引擎典範的基礎假設時,卻因為程序上的缺點而只有部分符合其假設。本研究旨在經由修改語言測驗及改變分組標準來克服其限制,並在修改後重新驗證差異引擎典範的適用性。另外,我們也嘗試檢驗經由紙筆速度測驗所測量的速度表現是否與差異引擎典範一致。

方法:本研究共有25位年輕成人(13位女性及12位男性)以及28位中老年人(15位女性及13位男性)參與。所有的參與者都會接受4個不同的紙筆速度測驗以及8個電腦速度測驗,各測驗涉及不同認知層面。所有電腦測驗的平均反應時間和變異性(標準差)會經由一系列的回歸分析和主成分分析來驗證差異引擎典範的假設。

結果:與Tsai (2015)的研究相較,本研究針對語言速度測驗的修訂有效地降低了錯誤率及提升了電腦速度測驗表現。在主成分分析中,發現大多數的電腦速度測驗及紙筆速度測驗的反應時間都在單一一般性速度因素上有高度的因素負荷量,共可解釋56.3%的變異量。將標準差與平均反應時間迴歸後,發現在兩年齡組中,速度表現的變異性會隨平均反應時間增加而線性增加 (r2 > .83)。另外,無論是在次分組或個體的層次,次分組(快組與慢組)的反應時間與其年齡組之平均反應時間也呈現高度的線性關係 (r2 > .98)。進一步將老年組分為三個次分組,並將他們在所有電腦速度測驗的平均反應時間個別迴歸到一年輕參照組的反應時間時,均呈現出高度的線性關係,且以老年慢組的斜率最陡。組間比較也發現老年慢組在一些紙筆測驗的反應時間的表現最弱(數字-符號替代測驗以及圖形設計流暢度測驗中的轉換分測驗)。

結論:本研究結果進一步支持差異引擎典範在次分組及個體中的主要假設。然而,本研究老年組教育年數偏高,可能會影響到現前結果的生態效度;且樣本數過小也使本研究結果進一步解釋及延伸有所限制。
Introduction: The Difference engine model (DEM) proposed by Myerson, Hale, Zheng, Jenkins, and Widaman (2003) attempted to demonstrate the performance on speeded tasks for various cognitive domains could be accounted for by a single factor – speed. Tsai (2015) validated the fundamental assumptions of the DEM in a Taiwanese sample with partial success due to several procedural drawbacks. This study aimed to overcome these drawbacks by modifying the verbal tasks used in Tsai’s study and applying a more stringent criterion for grouping, and retest whether or not the assumptions of the DEM still holds by these alterations. In addition, we also attempted to test whether or not the speed performance specified by the DEM are compatible with the performance measured by paper-and-pencil speeded tests.

Methods: There were 25 young adults (13 females and 12 males) and 28 older adults (15 females and 13 males) participated in this study. All participants underwent 4 different speeded paper-and-pencil tests and a set of 8 computerized speeded tasks that were associated with different domain of cognitive abilities. The mean reaction times (RTs) and variations (measured by SDs) of all computerized speed tasks were analyzed by a series of linear regression analyses and principal component analysis for examining the predictions of the DEM.

Results: Comparing to Tsai’s (2015) study, the manipulations of this study effectively reduced the error rates and facilitated the speed performance on the computerized tasks. A principal component analysis revealed the RTs of most computerized speed tasks and paper-and-pencil speed tests all loaded heavily on a general speed factor, which accounted for most of variance (56.3%) of the RT data. When the SDs were plotted against the mean RTs, the results revealed that the diversity in speed performance increased linearly with the RTs in both young and old groups (r2 >.83). In addition, the relations between the RTs of all subgroups (fast and slow) and their corresponding age groups were also strictly linear (the values of r2 > .98). By dividing the older participants into 3 subgroups and regressed their mean RTs of all computerized tasks on a young reference group, the results also showed strictly linear relations (r2 > .92) for all subgroups, with slow subgroup had the steepest slope than those of the other two subgroups. Group comparisons also showed that the old slow subgroup measured by RTs also had the worst performance on some paper-and-pencil tests (i.e., Coding and Switching condition of the Design Fluency Test).

Conclusion: The results of this study further support the major assumptions of the DEM, both at group and individual levels. However, the high education attainments of the old group in this study might limit the ecological validity of the present results; and small sample size might hamper the possibility to extend the interpretations of current data further.
指導教授推薦書..........................................................................................
口試委員會審定書......................................................................................
致謝...........................................................................................................iii
中文摘要..................................................................................................iv
ABSTRACT..............................................................................................vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................................................................ix
LIST OF FIGURES...................................................................................xi
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................xii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................-1-
1.1. DIFFERENCE ENGINE MODEL........................................................-4-
1.2. VALIDATION OF DEFFERENCE ENGINE MODEL..........................-12-
1.3. VALIDATION ISSUE OF THE DEM.................................................-16-
1.4. SPECIFIC AIMS .............................................................................-20-
CHAPTER 2. METHOD.......................................................................-23-
2.1. PARTICIPANTS.............................................................................-23-
2.2. APPARATUS AND TESTS..............................................................-24-
2.3. PROCEDURE.................................................................................-31-
2.4. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS..............................................................-31-
CHAPTER 3. RESULTS.......................................................................-37-
3.1. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA..................................................................-37-
3.2. VALIDATING THE MODIFICATIONS OF THE SPEED TASKS.........-37-
3.3. REACTION TIME AND TASK DIFFICULTY....................................-42-
3.4. GENERAL SPEED FACTOR............................................................-45-
3.5. SPEED VARIATION AND AMOUNT OF PROCESSING....................-48-
3.6. PROCESSUNG SPEED OF SUBGROUPS IN EACH AGE GROUP.......-50-
3.7. PROCESSING SPEED PERFORNANCE BETWEEN PARTICIPANTS.-55-
CHAPTER 4. DISCUSSION.................................................................-63-
4.1. VALIGATING THE MODIFICATION OF SPEED TASKS..................-63-
4.2. REACTION TIME AND TASK DIFFICULTY....................................-65-
4.3. PREDICTIONS OF DIFFERENCE ENGINE MODEL..........................-65-
4.4. SUMMARY....................................................................................-73-
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION...............................................................-75-
REFERENCE.........................................................................................-79-

List of Figures
FIGURE 1. The linear relationships between group SDs and mean RTs of the computerized speeded tasks.............................................................-49-
FIGURE 2. The relationships between the mean RTs of all subgroups and the group mean RTs of their corresponding age groups on the computerized speeded tasks. .................................................................-53-
FIGURE 3. The mean RTs of three old subgroups plotted against the group mean RTs of the young reference group on the computerized
tasks........................................................................................................-57-
FIGURE 4. The box plots of the slope and intercept for the linear functions of the mean RTs of individuals in the old subgroups regressed on the mean RTs of the young reference group.....................................-58-

List of Tables
TABLE 1. Demographic Data of All Age Groups................................-37-
TABLE 2. Total Mean Reaction Times and %Correct Responses of Computerized Speeded Tasks across Studies........................................-39-
TABLE 3. Reaction Times and Error Rates for Speed Tasks with Different Difficulty................................................................................-44-
TABLE 4. Principal Component Analysis of all Speeded Tasks..........-46-
TABLE 5. The Demographic Data and Grand Mean RTs of Slow and Fast.........................................................................................................-51-
TABLE 6. Parameters of Linear Reaction Time Functions for Individuals in Each....................................................................................................-54-
TABLE 7. The Correlation Coefficients between Parameters of the Reaction Time Function and Paper-and-pencil Test Scores..................-61-
TABLE 8. The Scores of the Paper-and-Pencil Tests of All Old Participants.............................................................................................-62-
Academia Sinica. (1993). Word List with Accumulated Word Frequency in News Corpus [in Chinese]. Taipei, Taiwan: Association of Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing.
Bäckman, L., & Small, B. J. (2007). Cognitive deficits in preclinical Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia: patterns of findings from the Kungsholmen Project. Physiology & Behavior, 92, 80-86. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.05.014
Bashore, T. R., & Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002). Older age, traumatic brain injury, and cognitive slowing: Some convergent and divergent findings. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 151-198. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.151
Brébion, G. (2001). Language processing, slowing, and speed/accuracy trade-off in the elderly. Experimental Aging Research, 27, 137-150. doi:10.1080/036107301750073999
Brinley, J. F. (1965). Cognitive sets, speed and accuracy of performance in the elderly. In A. T. Welford & J. E. Birren (Eds.), Behavior, aging and the nervous system (pp. 114–149): Springfield, IL: Thomas.
Bugg, J. M., Zook, N. A., DeLosh, E. L., Davalos, D. B., & Davis, H. P. (2006). Age differences in fluid intelligence: Contributions of general slowing and frontal decline. Brain and Cognition, 62, 9-16. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2006.02.006
Cepeda, N. J., Blackwell, K. A., & Munakata, Y. (2013). Speed isn't everything: Complex processing speed measures mask individual differences and developmental changes in executive control. Developmental Science, 16, 269-286. doi:10.1111/desc.12024
Cerella, J. (1985). Information processing rates in the elderly. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 67-83. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.1.67
Cerella, J., & Hale, S. (1994). The rise and fall in information-processing rates over the life span. Acta Psychologica, 86, 109-197. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(94)90002-7
Cerella, J., Poon, L. W., & Williams, D. M. (1980). Age and the complexity hypothesis. In L. W. Poon (Ed.), Aging in the 1980s: Psychological issues (pp. 332-340). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
Chen, J., Hale, S., & Myerson, J. (2007). Predicting the size of individual and group differences on speeded cognitive tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 534-541. doi:10.3758/BF03194103
D’Elia, L. F., Satz, P., Uchiyama, C. L., & White, T. (1996). Color Trails Test: Professional Manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
de Frias, C. M., Dixon, R. A., Fisher, N., & Camicioli, R. (2007). Intraindividual variability in neurocognitive speed: A comparison of Parkinson's disease and normal older adults. Neuropsychologia, 45, 2499-2507.
Deary, I. J., Johnson, W., & Starr, J. M. (2010). Are processing speed tasks biomarkers of cognitive aging? Psychology and Aging, 25, 219-228. doi:10.1037/a0017750
Delis, D. C., Kaplan, E., & Kramer, J. H. (2001). Delis-Kaplan Executive function system. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Ferraro, F. R. (1996). Cognitive slowing in closed-head injury. Brain and Cognition, 32, 429-440. doi:10.1006/brcg.1996.0075
Finkel, D., Reynolds, C. A., McArdle, J. J., & Pedersen, N. L. (2007). Age changes in processing speed as a leading indicator of cognitive aging. Psychology and Aging, 22, 558-568. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.22.3.558
Fry, A. F., & Hale, S. (2000). Relationships among processing speed, working memory, and fluid intelligence in children. Biological Psychology, 54, 1-34. doi:10.1016/S0301-0511(00)00051-X
Galloway-Long, H., & Huang-Pollock, C. (2018). Using inspection time and ex-Gaussian parameters of reaction time to predict executive functions in children with ADHD. Intelligence, 69, 186-194. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2018.06.005
Hale, S., & Jansen, J. (1994). Global processing-time coefficients characterize individual and group differences in cognitive speed. Psychological Science, 5, 384-389. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00290.x
Hale, S., & Myerson, J. (1995). Fifty years older, fifty percent slower? Meta-analytic regression models and semantic context effects. Aging & Cognition, 2, 132-145. doi:10.1080/13825589508256593
Hale, S., & Myerson, J. (1996). Experimental evidence for differential slowing in the lexical and nonlexical domains. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 3, 154-165. doi:10.1080/13825589608256621
Hale, S., Myerson, J., Smith, G. A., & Poon, L. W. (1988). Age, variability, and speed: Between-subjects diversity. Psychology and Aging, 3, 407-410. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.3.4.407
Kail, R. (1997). The neural noise hypothesis: Evidence from processing speed in adults with multiple sclerosis. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 4, 157-165. doi:10.1080/13825589708256644
Macniven, J. A. B., Davis, C., Ho, M. Y., Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E., & Constantinescu, C. S. (2008). Stroop performance in multiple sclerosis: information processing, selective attention, or executive functioning? Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 14, 805-814. doi:10.1017/s1355617708080946
Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (1993). General slowing and age invariance in cognitive processing: The other side of the coin. In J. Cerella, J. M. Rybash, W. Hoyer, & M. L. Commons (Eds.), Adult information processing: Limits on loss. (pp. 115-141). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.
Myerson, J., Hale, S., Zheng, Y., Jenkins, L., & Widaman, K. F. (2003). The difference engine: a model of diversity in speeded cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 262-288. doi:10.3758/BF03196491
Myerson, J., Lawrence, B., Hale, S., Jenkins, L., & Chen, J. (1998). General slowing of lexical and nonlexical information processing in dementia of the Alzheimer type. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 5, 182-193. doi:10.1076/anec.5.3.182.615
Nebes, R. D., & Brady, C. B. (1992). Generalized cognitive slowing and severity of dementia in Alzheimer's disease: Implications for the interpretation of response-time data. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 14, 317-326. doi:10.1080/01688639208402831
Rabbitt, P., & Goward, L. (1994). Age, information processing speed, and intelligence. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 47A, 741-760. doi:10.1080/14640749408401135
Romani, C., MacDonald, A., De Felice, S., & Palermo, L. (2018). Speed of processing and executive functions in adults with phenylketonuria: Quick in finding the word, but not the ladybird. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 35, 171-198. doi:10.1080/02643294.2017.1320278
Rozand, V., Lebon, F., Papaxanthis, C., & Lepers, R. (2015). Effect of mental fatigue on speed-accuracy trade-off. Neuroscience, 297, 219-230. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2015.03.066
Salthouse, T. A. (1992). Influence of processing speed on adult age differences in working memory. Acta Psychologica, 79, 155-170. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(92)90030-H
Salthouse, T. A. (2000). Aging and measures of processing speed. Biological Psychology, 54, 35-54. doi:10.1016/S0301-0511(00)00052-1
Salthouse, T. A., & Madden, D. J. (2008). Information processing speed and aging. In J. DeLuca & J. H. Kalmar (Eds.), Information processing speed in clinical populations. (pp. 221-241). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis.
Sliwinski, M., & Buschke, H. (1997). Processing speed and memory in aging and dementia. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 52, 308-318. doi:10.1093/geronb/52B.6.P308
Standage, D., Wang, D. H., Heitz, R. P., & Simen, P. (2015). Toward a unified view of the speed-accuracy trade-off. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 9, 139. doi:10.3389/fnins.2015.00139
Tsai, Y. Z. (2015). Validating the difference engine model of processing speed in a taiwanese sample. (Master's thesis, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan.) Retrieved from http://thesis.lib.cgu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22G00M0006101%22.
Vernon, P. A., & Jensen, A. R. (1984). Individual and group differences in intelligence and speed of information processing. Personality and Individual Differences, 5, 411-423. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(84)90006-0
Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
White, D. A., Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (1997). How cognitive is psychomotor slowing in depression? evidence from a meta-analysis. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 4, 166-174. doi:10.1080/13825589708256645
Wickelgren, W. A. (1977). Speed-accuracy tradeoff and information processing dynamics. Acta Psychologica, 41, 67-85. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(77)90012-9
Zheng, Y., Myerson, J., & Hale, S. (2000). Age and individual differences in visuospatial processing speed: Testing the magnification hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 113-120.
Zoccolotti, P., De Luca, M., Filippo, G. D., Marinelli, C. V., & Spinelli, D. (2018). Reading and lexical-decision tasks generate different patterns of individual variability as a function of condition difficulty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25, 1161-1169. doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1335-3
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top