Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
1 result(s) for "Schyle, Valentin"
Sort by:
Parallel and identical test–retest reliability of the Tower of London test – Freiburg version
The Tower of London - Freiburg version (TOL-F) was developed in three parallel-test versions (A, B, and C) that only differ in their physical appearance by interchanged ball colors, but not in their cognitive demands. We addressed the question whether the test-retest reliability of an identical problem set differs from the parallel test-retest reliability of a structurally identical problem set with a marginally different physical appearance. Reliabilities were assessed in two samples of young adults over a 1-week interval: In the parallel test-retest sample ( = 93; 49 female), half of the participants accomplished version A at the first session and version B at the second session, while the other half started with version B in the first session and continued with A in the second session. In the identical test-retest sample ( = 86; 48 female), half of the participants performed on version A in both the first and the second session, while the other half went through the same procedure with version B. For overall planning accuracy, intraclass correlation coefficients for absolute agreement were = .501 for the parallel test-retest and = .605 for the identical test-retest sample, with Pearson correlations of = .559 and = .708 respectively. Greatest lower bound estimates of reliability were adequate to high in the two samples (ranging between .765 and .854) confirming previous studies. Although the TOL-F revealed only moderate intraclass correlations for absolute agreement, it showed some of the highest psychometric indices compared to repeated assessments with other TOL tests.