Cognitive tasks borrowed from experimental psychology are often used to assess individual differences. A cardinal issue of this transition from experimental to correlational designs is reduced retest reliability of some well-established cognitive effects as well as speed–accuracy trade-off. The present study aimed to address these issues by examining the retest reliability of various methods for speed–accuracy integration and by comparing between two types of task modeling: difference scores and residual scores. Results from three studies on executive functions show that (a) integrated speed–accuracy scoring is generally more reliable as compared with nonintegrated methods: mean response time and accuracy; and (b) task modeling, especially residual scores, reduced reliability. We thus recommend integrating speed and accuracy, at least for measuring executive functions.

从实验心理学借来的认知任务通常用于评估个体差异。这种从实验性设计到相关性设计的转变的一个主要问题是降低了一些公认的认知效应的重测可靠性以及速度-准确性的权衡。本研究旨在通过检查各种速度-准确性集成方法的重测可靠性以及比较两种类型的任务建模：差异分数和残差分数来解决这些问题。三项关于执行功能的研究结果表明，（a）与非综合方法相比，综合速度-准确度评分通常更可靠：平均响应时间和准确度；(b) 任务建模，尤其是残差分数，降低了可靠性。因此，我们建议整合速度和准确性，