Traditionally, executive function (EF) tasks have been scored using either accuracy or reaction time (RT) metrics. The current study, which includes 1,015 first-grade children from the Family Life Project, demonstrates a new scoring approach for the Hearts and Flowers (HF) task that uses both item-level accuracy and RT data to estimate latent EF ability. Our primary aim was to compare scores derived from this approach to standard scores often reported in the HF literature. A second aim was to test whether item-level accuracy and RT data were differentially related to latent EF ability, depending on children's overall level of task performance. Our results indicated that item-level accuracy and RT data both convey unique information related to latent EF ability but that the relative contributions of each source of data vary across children. Accuracy was comparatively more informative of latent ability in children with lower HF task performance, while RT was comparatively more informative of latent ability in children with higher overall performance. Moreover, item-level RT was differentially related to latent EF ability for children in lower versus higher performing groups. Whereas faster responding was associated with higher ability in the higher performing group, slower responding was associated with higher ability for the lower performing group. Latent EF ability was related to criterion measures in ways comparable to traditional scores. Results are discussed in relation to the broader EF assessment literature. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

利用项目准确性和反应时间来提高儿童执行功能能力的测量。

传统上，执行功能 (EF) 任务已使用准确性或反应时间 (RT) 指标进行评分。目前的研究包括来自家庭生活项目的 1,015 名一年级儿童，展示了一种新的心与花 (HF) 任务评分方法，该方法使用项目级准确性和 RT 数据来估计潜在 EF 能力。我们的主要目的是将这种方法得出的分数与 HF 文献中经常报道的标准分数进行比较。第二个目的是测试项目级准确性和 RT 数据是否与潜在 EF 能力存在差异，这取决于儿童的整体任务表现水平。我们的结果表明，项目级准确性和 RT 数据都传达了与潜在 EF 能力相关的独特信息，但每个数据源的相对贡献因儿童而异。对于 HF 任务表现较低的儿童，准确率相对更能提供潜在能力的信息，而对于整体表现较高的儿童，RT 相对更能提供潜在能力的信息。此外，项目级 RT 与低绩效组和高绩效组儿童的潜在 EF 能力存在差异。较快的响应与较高绩效组的较高能力相关，而较慢的响应与较低绩效组的较高能力相关。潜在 EF 能力以与传统分数相当的方式与标准测量相关。结合更广泛的 EF 评估文献讨论了结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。而 RT 对总体表现较高的儿童的潜在能力提供了相对更多的信息。此外，项目级 RT 与低绩效组和高绩效组儿童的潜在 EF 能力存在差异。较快的响应与较高绩效组的较高能力相关，而较慢的响应与较低绩效组的较高能力相关。潜在 EF 能力以与传统分数相当的方式与标准测量相关。结合更广泛的 EF 评估文献讨论了结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。而 RT 对总体表现较高的儿童的潜在能力提供了相对更多的信息。此外，项目级 RT 与低绩效组和高绩效组儿童的潜在 EF 能力存在差异。较快的响应与较高绩效组的较高能力相关，而较慢的响应与较低绩效组的较高能力相关。潜在 EF 能力以与传统分数相当的方式与标准测量相关。结合更广泛的 EF 评估文献讨论了结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。项目级 RT 与低绩效组和高绩效组儿童的潜在 EF 能力存在差异。较快的响应与较高绩效组的较高能力相关，而较慢的响应与较低绩效组的较高能力相关。潜在 EF 能力以与传统分数相当的方式与标准测量相关。结合更广泛的 EF 评估文献讨论了结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。项目级 RT 与低绩效组和高绩效组儿童的潜在 EF 能力存在差异。较快的响应与较高绩效组的较高能力相关，而较慢的响应与较低绩效组的较高能力相关。潜在 EF 能力以与传统分数相当的方式与标准测量相关。结合更广泛的 EF 评估文献讨论了结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。结合更广泛的 EF 评估文献讨论了结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。结合更广泛的 EF 评估文献讨论了结果。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2020 APA，保留所有权利）。