↓ Skip to main content

Retest effects in working memory capacity tests: A meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
Retest effects in working memory capacity tests: A meta-analysis
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, June 2018
DOI 10.3758/s13423-018-1461-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jana Scharfen, Katrin Jansen, Heinz Holling

Abstract

The repeated administration of working memory capacity tests is common in clinical and research settings. For cognitive ability tests and different neuropsychological tests, meta-analyses have shown that they are prone to retest effects, which have to be accounted for when interpreting retest scores. Using a multilevel approach, this meta-analysis aims at showing the reproducibility of retest effects in working memory capacity tests for up to seven test administrations, and examines the impact of the length of the test-retest interval, test modality, equivalence of test forms and participant age on the size of retest effects. Furthermore, it is assessed whether the size of retest effects depends on the test paradigm. An extensive literature search revealed 234 effect sizes from 95 samples and 68 studies, in which healthy participants between 12 and 70 years repeatedly performed a working memory capacity test. Results yield a weighted average of g = 0.28 for retest effects from the first to the second test administration, and a significant increase in effect sizes was observed up to the fourth test administration. The length of the test-retest interval and publication year were found to moderate the size of retest effects. Retest effects differed between the paradigms of working memory capacity tests. These findings call for the development and use of appropriate experimental or statistical methods to address retest effects in working memory capacity tests.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 14%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 19 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 23 32%