Psychometric Characteristics of the N-Back Task: Construct Validity Across Age and Stimulus Type, Internal Consistency, Test-Retest and Alternate Forms Reliability
| dc.contributor.author | Hepdarcan, I. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Can, S. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2025-01-25T17:04:36Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2025-01-25T17:04:36Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2025 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Age-related impairments are observed in a variety of cognitive constructs, including significant deteriorations in working memory (WM) performance. To measure the WM, the commonly used task in cognitive aging is the n-back. Despite its widespread use, however, its psychometric properties have not been sufficiently studied. Previous research has typically examined construct validity by correlating n-back task measures with other WM tasks and has primarily assessed reliability through test-retest, occasionally including split-half reliability. In this study, we comprehensively examined the psychometric properties of the n-back task by evaluating its construct validity across different age groups (younger and older adults) and stimulus types (verbal and non-verbal) and by assessing reliability through three methods: test-retest, split-half, and alternate forms. Our findings showed similar performance in verbal and non-verbal n-back tasks for both younger and older adults in terms of discrimination ability and reaction time. However, age-related differences favored younger adults, providing evidence for construct validity. In addition, the n-back measures were stable over time, consistent for two halves, and comparable for different forms, demonstrating task. This study provides the first evidence supporting the validity of the n-back task with regard to age and stimulus type, alongside its reliability. These findings have important implications for clinical research and practice, suggesting that the n-back task can be confidently utilized in neuropsychological assessments. © The Author(s) 2025. | en_US |
| dc.description.sponsorship | Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu, TÜBİTAK; Izmir University of Economics, (SRP-2018-11) | en_US |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s12144-025-07318-9 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1046-1310 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1936-4733 | |
| dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-105001088349 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-07318-9 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14365/5833 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Springer | en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Current Psychology | en_US |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | en_US |
| dc.subject | Aging | en_US |
| dc.subject | N-Back Task | en_US |
| dc.subject | Reliability | en_US |
| dc.subject | Validity | en_US |
| dc.subject | Working Memory | en_US |
| dc.title | Psychometric Characteristics of the N-Back Task: Construct Validity Across Age and Stimulus Type, Internal Consistency, Test-Retest and Alternate Forms Reliability | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| gdc.author.scopusid | 57222592645 | |
| gdc.author.scopusid | 35363658400 | |
| gdc.bip.impulseclass | C4 | |
| gdc.bip.influenceclass | C5 | |
| gdc.bip.popularityclass | C4 | |
| gdc.coar.access | open access | |
| gdc.coar.type | text::journal::journal article | |
| gdc.collaboration.industrial | false | |
| gdc.description.department | İzmir Ekonomi Üniversitesi | en_US |
| gdc.description.departmenttemp | Hepdarcan I., Psychology Department, Izmir University of Economics, Fevzi Çakmak Mah. Sakarya Cd. No:156, Balçova, Izmir, 35330, Turkey; Can S., Psychology Department, Izmir University of Economics, Fevzi Çakmak Mah. Sakarya Cd. No:156, Balçova, Izmir, 35330, Turkey | en_US |
| gdc.description.endpage | 2059 | en_US |
| gdc.description.issue | 3 | en_US |
| gdc.description.publicationcategory | Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı | en_US |
| gdc.description.scopusquality | Q1 | |
| gdc.description.startpage | 2050 | en_US |
| gdc.description.volume | 44 | en_US |
| gdc.description.woscitationindex | Social Science Citation Index | |
| gdc.description.wosquality | Q1 | |
| gdc.identifier.openalex | W4406340113 | |
| gdc.identifier.wos | WOS:001395729500001 | |
| gdc.index.type | WoS | |
| gdc.index.type | Scopus | |
| gdc.oaire.accesstype | HYBRID | |
| gdc.oaire.diamondjournal | false | |
| gdc.oaire.impulse | 6.0 | |
| gdc.oaire.influence | 2.6054603E-9 | |
| gdc.oaire.isgreen | false | |
| gdc.oaire.popularity | 6.461044E-9 | |
| gdc.oaire.publicfunded | false | |
| gdc.openalex.collaboration | National | |
| gdc.openalex.fwci | 14.0891 | |
| gdc.openalex.normalizedpercentile | 0.99 | |
| gdc.openalex.toppercent | TOP 10% | |
| gdc.opencitations.count | 0 | |
| gdc.plumx.mendeley | 14 | |
| gdc.plumx.scopuscites | 6 | |
| gdc.scopus.citedcount | 6 | |
| gdc.virtual.author | Can, Seda | |
| gdc.wos.citedcount | 5 | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication | 3a263272-e3fa-47bb-afdd-a678aae74aec | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | 3a263272-e3fa-47bb-afdd-a678aae74aec | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | e9e77e3e-bc94-40a7-9b24-b807b2cd0319 | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | e29468f0-8215-4aea-9bb8-0b8c8adbb65d | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication | a42dba5b-3d5d-430e-8f4c-10d6dbc69123 | |
| relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | e9e77e3e-bc94-40a7-9b24-b807b2cd0319 |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
