Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The Penn Computerized Neurocognitive Battery (CNB) is a collection of tests validated using neuroimaging, genetics, and other criteria. An updated version of the CNB was constructed in which all tests were converted to either computerized adaptive (CAT) or abbreviated forms. In a mixed community/clinical sample ( N = 307; mean age = 25.9 years; 53.7% female), we tested measurement invariance across the CNB and CAT-CCNB in terms of factor configuration and loadings. Multiple-Group factor analyses were conducted with appropriate constraints, and results supported the measurement invariance assumption, with non-significant differences in chi-square fit statistics for both correlated-traits (Δχ 2 = 6.68; df = 12; p = .88) and bifactor (Δχ 2 = 16.02; df = 27; p = .95) configurations. Results indicate that the latent constructs measured by the two versions of the CNB are roughly equivalent and comparable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moore et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: