7538015059

PeerJ

Submitted 28 August 2015 Accepted 10November 2015 Published 22 December2015

Corresponding author

Brian J. Piper, [e-mail], [e-mail]

Academic editor Bob Patton

Additional Information and Declarations can be found on page 20

DOI 10.7717/peerj. 1460

© Copyright

2015 Piper et al.

Distributed under

Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

OPEN ACCESS

Reliability and yalidity of neurobehavioral function on the Psychology Experimental Building Language test battery in young adults

Brian J. Piper^1,2,3, Shane T. Mueller⁴, Alexander R. Geerken¹,

Kyle L. Dixon⁵, Gregory Kroliczak\ Reid H.J. Olsen³ and Jeremy K. Miller¹

¹ Department of Psychology, Willamette University, Salem, OR, United States Department of Psychology, Bowdoin College, Bowdoin, ME, United States

³    Department of Behavioral Neuroscience, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR, United States

⁴    Department of Cognitive and Learning Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, United States

^? Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, United States ⁶ Action and Cognition Laboratory, Department of Social Sciences, Institute of Psychology,

Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan, Poznan, Poland

ABSTRACT

Background. The Psychology Experiment Building Language (PEBL) software consists of over one-hundred computerized test s based on classic and novel cognitive neuropsychology and behavioral neurology measures. Although the PEBL tests are becoming morę widely utilized, there is currently very limited information about the psychometrie properties of these measures.

Methods. Study I examined inter-relationships among nine PEBL tests including indices of motor-function (Pursuit Rotor and Dexterity), attention (Test of Attentional Vigilance and Time-Wall), working memory (Digit Span Forward), and executive-function (PEBL Trail Making Test, Berg/Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Iowa Gambling Test, and Mental Rotation) in a normative sample (N = 189, ages 18-22). Study II evaluated test-retest reliability with a two-week interest interval between administrations in a separate sample (N = 79, ages 18-22).

Results. Moderate intra-test, but Iow inter-test, correlations were observed and ceiling/floor effects were uncommon. Sex differences were identified on the Pursuit Rotor (Cohens d = 0.89) and Mental Rotation (d = 0.31) tests. The correlation between the test and retest was high for tests of motor learning (Pursuit Rotor time on target r = .86) and attention (Test of Attentional Vigilance response time r = .79), intermediate for memory (digit span r = .63) but lower for the executive function indices (Wisconsin/Berg Card Sorting Test perseverative errors = .45, Tower of London moves = .15). Significant practice effects were identified on several indices of executive function.

Conclusions. These results are broadly supportive of the reliability and yalidity of individual PEBL tests in this sample. These findings indicate that the freely downloadable, open-source PEBL battery (http://pebl.sourceforge.net) is a versatile research tool to study individual differences in neurocognitive performance.

How to cite this article Piper et al. (2015), Reliability and validity of neurobehavioral function on the Psychology Experimental Building Language test battery in young adults. PeerJ 3:el460; DOI 10.7717/peerj. 1460