An evaluation of the predictive properties of measures of variability of performance on three psychomotor tasks

Citation preview

wraXMsnsm m tm mmmtm tmamnm of

ah MmSUMI OF fA B SiB lM W OF WWLmW&MM 0 1 fB E H F sro a o n o tm f a s i s

If Eofeorfc C i^XEsmtoA

tlmmtm «ufe»tt%od to tfe* F a cu lty o f th e O rotostte School o f *&» OftJhreroifcy o f H&»yla®& in fa&rtittA f u l f i l l m e n t o f th o reMI'!ffS T h is r e se a r c h was conducted i n p a r t under C ontract Mo. AW 3 3 - 0 3 ?-5^8 he tw een th e U .S .A .? . S ch ool o f A v ia tio n M ed icine, Bandolrh f ie ld * Terns* and th e P sy ch o lo g y Department o f th e U n iv e r s ity o f M aryland.

The co o p er­

a t io n o f C apt. Robert B. Payne* I t . Grady w is e , and Br. Glen 1 . F inch i s a p p r e c ia te d . The w r it e r w ish e s to e x p ress h is a p p r e c ia tio n and g r a t itu d e to Dr. Hubert T. Walker f o r d ir e c t in g t h i s research* and to Br. f . G. Andrews and o th e r members o f th e s t a f f o f the Department o f P sych ology f o r t h e ir a d v ic e .and gu id a n ce throughout th e stu d y .

The w r it e r i s in d eb ted to

I)r. Bay 0 . Hackman. who has g iv e n g e n e r o u sly o f h ie tim e and c o u n se l from th e i n i t i a t i o n o f th e stu d y to i t s c o n c lu s io n . Without th e w h o le-h ea rted c o o p e r a tiv e e f f o r t o f M essrs. Joseph McGrath* Hebert Garter* Howard Hembree* fhomae Hussraan, P aul M uller* Heuben S h e v lts* Laurence Broad* and Thomas Coonan, who a id e d i n the con­ s t r u c t io n o f th e apparatus* a d m in is tr a tio n o f th e experim ent* and in s t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is o f th e data* t h is experim ent co u ld not have been con d u cted . The w r it e r i s g r a t e f u l to Mrs. W illiam Kenner fo r ty p in g and. c l e r i c a l a s s is t a n c e throughout th e stu d y .

11

TABLE Of COSTKIfS Page chap? m i

im m m & viQ M ahd s t a t w h h t o f tk b f b o b iw

G rid in and S ig n ific a n c e o f the Problem H is t o r ic a l Background

......................

14 1?

• ...............................................................

17

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ■ • • • • • • •

IS

............................ • • • • • • •

27

Types o f S co res

. . . . . . . .

B xp erim eatal Environment

...........................

29

P r o c e d u r e ............................ .................................... . . .................................... m m rm t i t

1 4

MJSfHQDS AS© APPABASSS

HxperiiaeantaX Zteelga A pparatus

...................

......................

Statem ent o f th e Problem O F JH ia I I

i

m i s s i s o r u s t j i t s w m th x s .a .m . m s a m f is c t it wear

29 35

L ev e l o f Perform ance * B o ta iy Pur«ul t T est

76

Homogeneity o f T r ia l Score V a r i a b i l i t y ...............................

hj

I n tr a -I n d lv ld u a l V a r ia b ilit y : I m t r n - B a y ..........................................

45

In tr a -X n d iv id n a l V a r ia b ilit y : Xat©v-B®y. . . . . . . . . .

56

Tim® o f T ra in in g to Beach a C r ite r io n

...................

Summary o f C on clu sion e f o r th e B otary P u r su it T e st * • CHAPFJSB IV

.• •

AHALVSIS OF BBStfXTS M l TBB S.A .H . WO-HAMD . COQitDlIAfXOM TEST

L evel ©f P erfo m a n c#

..................................................

59 62

64 64

H aeegeitelty o f 30-5eeond Score V a r i a b i l i t y .....................................

68

I n tr a -I n d iv id u a l V a r ia b ilit y : Intra-D ay

69

.....................................

In tr a —I n d iv id u a l V a r ia b ilit y : I n t e r - B a y ...........................

75

ill

Pgyr# T is© o f d ra in in g to fMeach a T&rf ortaaaoe C r i t e r i o n ..........

7B

Siaaaaaiy o f Conclusion® f o r tli# i’wo-Haad C o o ^ la a U o a T est • e stm * f

o# sg t im s COOM)XMAfIOM Tin/?

a h a iy sis

fob

fu n

s . a . m, g o k f i s

8SS ...........................

Lm rel o f F orforaane*

82

Homogeneity o f V a r ia b ilit y o f Perform ance Seem® . . . . .

66

Im tr a -In d lT lism l V a r ia b ilit y !

I m t r a ^ l t e y ........................... .

88

X&tra-XadlTldBal V a r ia b ilit y !

Xatouvltegr

............................

99

........................

101

Stsnamry o f C on clu sion # f o r th o ^omrplmit C oord in ation f a s t . .

10%

•

Timm o f f m in in g to H*ach « C r ite r io n

o m p tm tx

AiALYsxs o f tr n m m m r im ® m o m y a sk s

la t o r c o r r a ls t lo a # o f Measure® o f I n i t i a l and F in a l F erfo ra rn e* ............................ Sim m ry o f C o n clu sio n s f o r th e A n a ly s is o f I n te r r e la tio n ® Among Task© . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . om Ffsm v i i

BiscossioM * m m -m x , A m eoncum iosrs

D is c u s s io n o f Be su it®

.................................................................

105

105 1X2 113

113

t e m z g r ®»d C o n c lu s io n s .......................................................... 8 M

®

BX5U06IUFBT

ju m o o x x a t& rm a n x b &wmm% 0 JJPFSJTDIX D

12 123

vxaxsa m o u n t s axd vovevxosAi* w®?mx:*?iam O f AFPmkTVS

125

m m m m m im m m t

i r?

t o m ^ % m v s m m s aed s w b c x s fAM JS OF S S 0 SCOSFS AS3) Cmi'MB!) BlfXAfI0EG

142

148

It

h i m ojr t a b l s s M k

lo . I

Enen O rder o f P r a c tic e on T & sk * .............................

3©

II

Jfeaber o f T r ia ls § i ? t a «& la.eh T***8c.....................................

32

III

A n a ly s is o f V ariance f o r Between Droop D if f e r e n c e s . B otary P u r su it f e e t D a ily Steen T r ia l Score® (X ^). ® * 30 . . . . . ..............

3®

I?

¥ ¥1 ¥11

fill

IX

X

XI

XII

XXII

A n a ly s is o f V arian ce f o r Between ©roup M ffe r e n e e e * B otaty P a r s e ! t f o o t Kena T r ia l S ee r e e (3^}« Oroup# A and B. 1 * 20

. . . .

3®

A n a ly s is o f V ariance o f B otary lair s u it f e e t t o t a l Kean B a lly T r ia l S c o r e s . 1 ® 24 . . . . . .

4©

In te r -B a y C o r r e la tio n * o f Eot&ar P u rsu it f e e t D a ily Mean t r i a l Score* (S ^ ). 1 * 3© ...........................

41

Z a te n s e r v e la tio iie o f S e le c te d Measures o f Perform ance (X .) on th e Rotary Pursui t f e e t . I • JO T . . . ...................................................... . .

42

A n a ly s is o f V ariance f o r Between In d iv id u a l D iffe r e n c e s* Rotary P u r s u it f e * t B e lly Mean, T r ia l S cores (J^) » 9 m J O ....................................

43

X, Bat lea * f e e t f o r Homogeneity o f V a r ia b ilit y o f Kotaxy P er s o l t f e e t T r ia l S cores (It ) . b ® 3 0 .................................................................. r .........................

44

A n a ly s is o f V ariance o f B etnry P u r su it t e s t T o ta l Standard D eviation® o f D a ily T r ia l s c o r e s . II * 3 4 ................................

47

I n t e r l a y C o r r e la tio n s o f R otary P u rsu it f a s t Standard D e v ia tio n s o f D a ily T r ia l S c o r e s. X * 3©.......................................... .... ............................................. .... .

48

A n a ly s is o f V ariance f o r Between In d iv id u a l D iffe r e n c e s* Botayy P u r su it T est Standard D ev ia tio n * o f T r ia l S c o r e s . 9 m J O .......................... A n a ly st* o f V ariance f o r Between Group D ifT eren ces* .Rotary P u r su it T est Standard D e v ia tio n * o f T r ia l S c o r e s . X ® 3© . . . . . . . .

49

5®

Y

m m XIV

XV XVI

XVXI XVIII

XIX XX

XXI XXII

XXIII XXIV XXV

A n a ly st s o f Vnrt&noe f o r Betu m n D iffe r e n c e s* Mot&ry P u rsu it D ev ia tio n * o f f r i a l Scores* B. » • 20 . . .........................

Group f e e t Standard Cronos A and . . ......................................... .

lu t e r c o r r e la t io n s o f $rtrax>ed H eaeares o f V a r ia b ility * B o ta iy P u r su it f e e t * 1 * 3 0 ........... R otary P u r su it f e e t Froduct-Mement C o r r e la tio n * Between V a r ia b ilit y (0 * ) and Perform ance (1^) on th e Sane Bay. J • 30

XXVII

52

. . . . .

53

C o r r e la tio n o f In tra -B ey V a r ia b ilit y w ith D a ily Mean Score# B o ta iy P u rsu it f e e t . 1 * 10 . , , , . ,

5^

In te r -B e y C a rrela tIo n a o f Rot&iy P u rsu it T est Standard D e v ia tio n s and V arian ces o f D a ily T r ia l S c o r e s . M » 3 Q ...............................................................

55

In te r -B e y Measure® o f V a r ia b ility * Betaxy P a ren tt f e e t ............................................................................... C o r r e la tio n s o f Measures o f In te r -B e y V a r ia b ilit y w ith Me&sares o f P e rfem a n e* and In tra-D ay V a r ia b ilit y on th e Rotary P u r su it f e e t . S * 3 0 .........................................................

5^

58

Jfmaber o f T r i a l s t o Beach Two C r it e r ia o f Perform ance on th e Botaxy P u r su it f e e t . . . . . . C o r r e la tio n s o f SEKtber o f T r ia ls t o a C r ite r io n w ith Measure® ©f V a r ia b ilit y and Perform ance on th e R e tsjy P u rsu it f e e t . H * 3 0 ......................... A n a ly e ie o f V ariance o f th e Two-Band C oord in ation f e e t t o t a l Mean B a lly T r ia l Score®. 1 * Zh

. 6-0

6l

. . . .

66

In ter-D a y C o r r e la tio n s o f Dwo-JBmd C oord in ation T est D a ily T r ia l Score® 1 *3 0 ............................... A n a ly e ie o f V ariance o f th e fi/o-S an d C oord in ation f o o t D a ily Mean T r ia l Score® ( f .J * Bays 1- 1 0 .

$ ~ 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XXVI

51

6?

.

.

68

1^ Matios* f e e t f o r Homogeneity o f V a r ia b ilit y o f th e Two-Sand C oord in ation T est 3 C-Second Score® (Tfe) « B * 3 0 ......................................................... A n a ly s is o f Variance* Two-Hand C oord in ation T est f e t a l Standard D e v ia tio n s o f D a ily 30-S econ d S c o r e s. B * 2k - ..............................................

^9

VI

Ti

laUs-JfeX X ?Ill

XXIX

XXX

XXXX

XXXIX XXXIXI

XXXI?

XXX?

XXXfl XDOTXI

XXXYZIX

.XXXIX

XL

£agg A n a ly s is o f V ariance f o r Between ©roup D iffe r e n c e s* fvo-H and C oord in ation T est Standard D e v ia tio n s o f 7 0 - Second Scores* Uajr« 1 * 1 0 . ¥ * 30 . . . ........................................................

72

In ter-D ay C o r r e la tio n s o f Two-Hand C oord in ation T est Standard D e v ia tio n s o f 30 -S ecoad S co w * (a^) • ¥ « 30 . « . ................................................... •

73

A n a ly s is o f V ariance f o r Between In d iv id u a l D iffe r e n c e s* Two-Hand C oord in ation f o o t Standard D e v ia tio n s o f ^ -S e c o n d S cores ( a J » Bays 1 * 1 0 . B « 3 0 .......................................................

7h

C orrelation ® o f Measures o f P erfen ean ee and V a r ia b ility * Two-Band C oord in ation t e s t . X * 30 . . . . .............................................

75

In to r-D cy M easures o f V a r ia b ility * Two-Hand C oord in ation ? e s t . I' « 3© • • * • * • * .........................

76

C o r r e la tio n s o f Intra-C ay and In ter-D ay Measures o f In ti» -In d iY t& u a l V&riaM Xity* Two-Hand C oord in ation T e s t . B * 3$ • • ...................* ......................

7?

C o r r e la tio n s o f Measures o f In ter-D ay V a r ia b ilit y With Measures o f Perfox&an&e* Two-Band C oord in ation T e s t . 1 * 3 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

77

dumber o f T r ia ls to Beach Three C r it e r ia o f Performance on th e Two-Hand C oord in ation T e s t ..........................................................................................................

79

In te r c o r r e l a t 1ans o f Macaber o f T r ia ls to Beach Three Perform ance C r it e r ia . If «3 0 ..........................

79

C o r r e la tio n s o f Measures o f P erfo m a n ee and Xntra—Day V a r ia b ilit y w ith ftm ber o f T r ia ls t o Beach One P e r fe c t T r ia l* Two-Bead Coordi­ n a tio n T e s t . H * 3 0 ....................................................................

80

A n a ly s is o f V ariance f o r Between Croup D iffe r e n c e s* Complex C o o rd in ation T est D a ily Mean Hupber o f P a tte r n s Matched p@r T r ia l S e r ie s