Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-10T12:18:16.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes in Factor Structure of a Complex Psychomotor Test as a Function of Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Edwin A. Fleishman  and
Walter E. Hempel Jr.
Edwin A. Fleishman
Affiliation:
AF Personnel and Training Research Center* Lackland Air Force Base San Antonio, Texas
Walter E. Hempel Jr.
Affiliation:
AF Personnel and Training Research Center* Lackland Air Force Base San Antonio, Texas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Scores obtained at eight different stages of practice on the Complex Coordination Test together with scores on 18 reference tests were subjected to a Thurstone Centroid Factor Analysis. Nine meaningful factors were identified in the experimental battery. The results indicated considerable, but systematic, changes in the factor structure of the Complex Coordination Test as practice on the task was continued. The test became less complex (factorially) as practice was continued. Moreover, there was a change in the nature of the factors contributing variance at early and later stages of practice. Implications of the findings are related to certain problems of learning theory, psychomotor test development, and criterion analysis.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , September 1954 , pp. 239 - 252
Copyright
Copyright © 1954 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Skill Components Research Laboratory. The opinions or conclusions contained in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or indorsement of the Department of the Air Force.

The writers are indebted to Dr. Jack A. Adams for the basic data on which this analysis is based.

References

Adams, J. A. The prediction of performance at advanced stages of training on a complex psychomotor task, San Antonio, Tex.: Human Resources Research Center, Lackland Air Force Base, 1953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anastasi, A. The influence of specific experience upon mental organization. Genetic Psychol. Monogr., 1936, 18, 245–255Google Scholar
Fleishman, E. A. A factor analysis of intra-task performance on two psychomotor tests. Psychometrika, 1953, 18, 45–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleishman, E. A. Testing for psychomotor abilities by means of apparatus tests. Psychol. Bull., 1953, 50, 241–262CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greene, E. B. An analysis of random and systematic changes with practice. Psychometrika, 1943, 8, 37–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P., Fruchter, B., Zimmerman, W. S. Factor analysis of the Army Air Forces Shepard Field Battery of experimental aptitude tests. Psychometrika, 1952, 17, 45–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (Ed.) Printed Classification Tests. AAF Aviation Psychology Program Research Report No. 5, 1947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melton, A. W. (Ed.) Apparatus Tests. AAF Aviation Psychology Program Research Report No. 4, 1947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, W. B. Factor analysis of tests and criteria: a comparative study of two AAF pilot populations. Psychol. Monogr., 1949, 63, 298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, B. The effect of learning on the predictability of psychomotor performance. J. exp. Psychol., 1952, 44, 189–198CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seashore, R. H. Work and motor performance. In Stevens, S. S. (Eds.), Handbook of experimental psychology, New York: Wiley, 1951Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. Multiple-factor analysis, Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press, 1947Google Scholar
Woodrow, H. Factors in improvement with practice. J. Psychol., 1939, 7, 55–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodrow, H. The ability to learn. Psychol. Rev., 1946, 53, 147–158CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woodrow, H. The application of factor-analysis to problems of practice. J. gen. Psychol., 1939, 21, 457–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodrow, H. The relation between abilities and improvement with practice. J. educ. Psychol., 1938, 29, 215–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodrow, H. The relation of verbal ability to improvement with practice in verbal tests. J. educ. Psychol., 1939, 30, 370–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zachert, Virginia, Friedman, G. Factorial comparisons of two Aircrew Classification Batteries with and without the variable of previous flying experience, San Antonio, Tex.: Human Resources Research Center, Lackland Air Force Base, 1952Google Scholar
Zachert, Virginia, Ivens, F. C. Comparative factor analyses of tests using three different scoring techniques, San Antonio, Tex.: Human Resources Research Center, Lackland Air Force Base, 1951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, W. S. A simple graphical method for orthogonal rotation of axes. Psychometrika, 1946, 11, 51–55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed