Concentration performance test

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The concentration-performance test ( KLT ) is based on a procedure described by Heinrich Düker (1949) to determine general psychological performance. The test aims to measure the ability to concentrate in terms of resilience, endurance and resistance to fatigue, whereby the test results should only depend slightly on intellectual prerequisites. The test developed by Düker & Lienert (1965, p. 4) is intended to record long-term tension in contrast to tests for short-term tension (e.g. test d2 ).

Theoretical background

The concentration performance test (KLT) is one of the objective performance tests. Düker (1949, p. 10) himself built the procedure on the concept of coordination, solving the KLT tasks makes the orderly interaction of the individual activities "understand", "calculate", "memorize", "call-up" and "decide" required for an overall activity. These competencies are tested through complex computing tasks that also include short-term storage capabilities.

By the end of the 1990s at the latest, the KLT was out of date in terms of the standards and the school groups identified in the manual, so there were school groups that no longer existed at the time (e.g. high school students, 14-year-old vocational and vocational college students). These lawsuits prompted a new development of this test procedure, which began in 2000 by a working group at the University of Regensburg with a reworking of the KLT from 1969 and was completed with the publication of the KLT-R in 2001 ( Lukesch & Mayrhofer, 2001 ). Not only was the procedure re-standardized, the presentation of the test items and thus the test evaluation was also changed.

Test setup

The KLT is a paper and pencil test , it can be carried out as an individual or group test. The procedure has two levels of difficulty and two parallel forms.

The test form of the new KLT-R consists of 9 task blocks, each with 20 arithmetic tasks, each of which has a processing time of 2 minutes. This arrangement makes it possible to obtain information about the total amount of performance, the performance quality (e.g. error percentage) and the constancy or fluctuation of the performances (fluctuation range, distribution of the errors made in the three test thirds).

Each test item consists of the addition and subtraction of two times three single-digit numbers; the intermediate results must be noted; an overall result is then calculated according to different rules. To determine the value for each item, either one rule (easier form: KLT-R 4-6, for use with students from the 4th to the 6th school year) or two rules (more difficult form: KLT- R 6-13, intended for test subjects from the 6th to 13th school year and for adults).

The rule for the KLT-R 4-6 is: Form the two sums from the three single-digit numbers, note the result, subtract the smaller number from the larger one and enter the result in a box.

The two rules for the KLT-R 6-13 are: 1st rule: If the upper number (sum of the three single-digit numbers) is greater than the lower, then the lower must be subtracted from the upper and the result entered in the box . 2nd rule: If the upper number is smaller than the lower one, then the lower number should be added to the upper one and the result should be entered in the box.

Intermediate results must be kept in mind and must not be written down on the exercise sheet. After 2 minutes you move on to the next task block.

evaluation

For the evaluation of the procedure, solution templates are available for the two levels of difficulty and the two parallel forms. Based on this evaluation, the following indices are calculated:

  • (1) Total amount of work, defined as the number of correctly and incorrectly processed tasks (GL = RWR + RWF),
  • (2) Number of correctly processed items (RWR = raw value of correctly solved tasks),
  • (3) Number of incorrectly processed items (RWF = raw value of incorrectly solved tasks),
  • (4) Error percentage (F% = [RWF] x 100 / [RWR + RWF]),
  • (5) Fluctuation range (SBR = difference between the correct solutions from the task block with the greatest and the least performance; is only calculated for the correctly solved tasks).
  • (6) In addition, the distribution of the errors made over the three test thirds is determined.

The results are converted into normal values ( percentile rank and standard values). Conversion tables for the KLT-R 4-6 are available for

  • (1) Primary school (4th grade)
  • (2) Hauptschule (5th grade)
  • (3) Realschule (5th grade)
  • (4) Gymnasium (5th grade)
  • (5) 5th grade (weighted according to school type proportions)
  • (6) Hauptschule (6th grade)
  • (7) Realschule (6th grade) * (8) Gymnasium (6th grade)
  • (9) 6th grade (weighted according to school type proportions)

Similar standard tables, also broken down according to grade and school type, are available for the KLT-R 6-13.

Quality criteria

objectivity

  • The implementation objectivity is ensured by a standardized implementation procedure and the use of uniform test materials and precise time specifications.
  • The objectivity of the evaluation is given by the use of templates. Reading errors should be avoided by a trained diagnostician.
  • The objectivity of interpretation results from the standard tables.

Reliability

For all partial samples and the two test forms, the essential item and test criteria have been calculated with satisfactory values.

For the new test form of the KLT-R, the reliability of the method was estimated using coefficients of internal consistency (Cronbach's α); the nine test blocks were used as items. These values ​​are usually above .95 for correctly solved tasks, and mostly above .80 for incorrectly solved tasks.

validity

Convergent validity

Relatively high correlations exist with the indicators of the performance quantity from the d2 (GZ or GZ-F) and the KLT-R, whereas the correlations between the measures of performance quality are lower. The correlative relationships between the volume output from the KLT-R 6-13 and the PSB 9 (number addition) varied between .51 and .58, the correlations to the PSB 10 (number comparison) were between .25 and .79, the error values ​​from the KLT -R, on the other hand, hardly correlated with the indicators from the PSB.

Divergent validity

A correlative comparison with the results of the calculation test 4-6 (RT 4-6, Lobeck et al., 1990) showed substantial correlations between the correct solutions in the KLT-R and the RT 4-6; these indicate that the concentration tasks contain a relatively high material factor. Although the computational performance required in the KLT-R is of a basic nature (basic arithmetic operations with single-digit numbers), the performance in the KLT-R also reflects the subjects' general arithmetic skills .

The reasoning tasks from the PSB (= series of numbers) were used to check the relationship between concentration and intelligence . The correlations to the amount of power from the KLT-R 6-13 were .40 and to the quality of performance -.33. I.e. an independence of intelligence and concentration could not be proven. Rather, the ability to concentrate for longer seems to be a prerequisite for successfully coping with intelligence tasks.

Criterion-related validity

The connection with school performance is particularly important here. Such studies were only made in high school students in the 9th and 10th grades. Relationships as expected were indicated, but only a connection between a high F% value and poor math grades could be statistically verified. Significant differences with regard to the performance value in KLT-R 6-13 were found between students who rate themselves as good or less good at school.

The clear age progression of the test performance in both variants of the procedure can be viewed as proof of validity. There were also clear differences in performance according to the type of school (high school students always had the best performance compared to secondary and secondary school students). Gender-related differences, however, did not occur; As a result, no standard calculations by gender were necessary.

Secondary quality criteria

Norms

  • For the KLT-R 4-6, a standardization sample of around 860 Bavarian schoolchildren could be examined.
  • For the KLT-R 6-13, a sample of approx. 2600 was achieved.
  • These numbers are reduced by dividing the two parallel forms A and B (KLT-R 4-6, Form A 430 test persons, Form B 428 test persons; KLT-R 6-13 Form A 1364 and Form B 1309 pupils) and through the division according to grades and school types.

Test fairness

In the standardization study, information was collected from 130 test managers. The general applicability of the procedure was confirmed. There was definitely the impression that the procedure is very strenuous and places high demands on the ability to concentrate. A survey of school pupils also confirmed that the procedure corresponds to the test intention, i. H. it is perceived as difficult, strenuous and requires concentration and requires a high degree of coordination of individual activities while simultaneously ignoring distracting stimuli.

Economy

The KLT can be viewed as an economic test with an implementation time of 18 minutes (two minutes per task block) and a further 10 minutes for introduction and instruction.

literature

  • Düker, H. (1949). About a method for determining mental performance. Psychological Research , 23 , 10-24.
  • Düker, H. & Lienert, GA (1965). Concentration performance test. KLT. Manual instruction. Göttingen: Hogrefe .
  • Lobeck, A., Frei, M. & Blöchinger, R. (1990). Swiss math test 4th - 6th grade. Basel: Beltz .
  • Lukesch, H. & Mayrhofer, S. (2001). KLT-R. Revised version of the concentration-performance test by H. Düker & GA Lienert Göttingen: Hogrefe.