Longitudinal Consistency of Matching Familiar Figures Test. Performance From Early Childhood to Preadolescence. Per F. Gjerde, Jack Block, and Jeanne H.
Developmental Psychology 1985, Vol. 21, No. 2, 262-271
Copyright 1985 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0012-l649/85/$00.75
Longitudinal Consistency of Matching Familiar Figures Test Performance From Early Childhood to Preadolescence Per F. Gjerde, Jack Block, and Jeanne H. Block
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
University of California, Berkeley Age-appropriate versions of the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) were administered to a longitudinally followed sample of children at ages 3, 4, 5, and 11. Uncorrected for attenuation, MFFT error scores were more consistent over time than MFFT latency scores for both girls and boys. When the longitudinal MFFT correlations were corrected for attenuation, the magnitude of the MFFT error coefficients increased considerably, whereas the magnitude of the MFFT latency coefficients remained basically unchanged. Thus MFFT latency scores seem to have relatively little long-term implication as compared to MFFT error scores. Across-time consistency of MFFT error scores was an appreciable function of performance IQ, supporting a "competence" view rather than a "conceptual tempo" view of what the MFFT measures. In girls, the size of the inverse relation between MFFT error and MFFT latency increased from age 3 to age 5 and then leveled off. In boys, this relationship remained unchanged between age 3 and age 5 but increased markedly after age 5. The several implications of these results for the validity of the MFFT as a measure of an enduring cognitive style are discussed.
The Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) was introduced and posited as a measure of a cognitive style labeled "reflection-impulsivity" (Kagan, Rosman, Day, Albert, & Phillips, 1964). Partly because of the many important behavioral implications of the evocative terms reflection and impulsivity and despite the controversy that surrounds it (Block, Block, & Harrington, 1974, 1975), the MFFT continues to enjoy considerable research popularity, although it has become increasingly clear that short latencies in tasks involving response uncertainty are not indicators of impulsivity as a personality trait or behavioral syndrome (see Kogan, 1983, for a recent review). The present study reports extensive longitudinal data on MFFT performance measured on four separate occasions and over a period of 8 years, from age 3 to age 11. This
This study was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH 16080 to Jack and Jeanne H. Block. Per F. Gjerde was supported by Grant B.68.80.006 from the Norwegian Research Council for Science and the Humanities. Requests for reprints should be sent to Per F. Gjerde or Jack Block, Department of Psychology, Tolman Hall, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720.
unprecedented data set not only permits evaluation of MFFT performance over a time span more than twice as long as any previous study, the current study is also the first to have compared MFFT performance in the same group of children at two distinct stages of the early life cycle—at preschool age and at preadolescence. A longitudinal examination of MFFT scores is warranted for several reasons. First, a certain degree of temporal consistency in MFFT performance is implied when the MFFT is referred to as a cognitive style measure. However, relatively few studies have examined the longitudinal consistency of MFFT response latencies and errors, and none have encompassed a period spanning more than 3 years. Second, an examination of the separate longitudinal consistency of the two MFFT component scores—latencies and errors—is relevant to the current controversy over the psychological meaning of the MFFT (cf. Block et al., 1974, 1975; Kagan & Messer, 1975). Although "reflection-impulsivity" was initially conceptualized in terms of differences in response latency, children were subsequently operationally classified on the basis of both the latency and the accuracy of their test responses. The intro-
262
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
LONGITUDINAL CONSISTENCY OF MFFT PERFORMANCE
duction of an additional source of variance— number of errors (response accuracy)—caused this operationalization to depart in important and unevaluated ways from the original conceptual definition of reflection-impulsivity. When separately evaluated, it has been argued, the empirical evidence indicates that the differences formerly attributed to "conceptual tempo" (response latency) is primarily due to "competence" (response accuracy; see Block et al., 1974). Knowledge about the longitudinal consistency of MFFT latency and error scores can provide additional, important information about their comparative conceptual and empirical significance. Before turning to previous longitudinal studies of the MFFT, we call attention to the distinction between the stability of MFFT scores (their absolute level, or sameness) and the consistency of MFFT scores (the relative ordering of individuals within the same peer group, or cohort) at different age levels. This relatively simple distinction has not been adequately recognized in previous studies. Messer and Brodzinsky (1981), for example, have reported data on what they referred to as the stability of MFFT performance from age 11 to age 14. But correlating MFFT scores at two different ages provides only consistency information and not information about the stability of MFFT scores. As developmentally can be expected, MFFT scores are not stable over time (e.g., there is substantial evidence for increasing latencies and decreasing errors with age; see Kogan, 1976). However, the absence of stability does not preclude the presence of ordering consistency. Previous longitudinal examinations of MFFT performance have reported low-tomoderate consistency correlations. In studies spanning more than 2 years, error scores have been found to be slightly more consistent than latencies. For example, Ward (1973) reported that over a 3-year period, latency correlations ranged from . 13 to .24, and error correlations ranged from .34 to .51. Messer (1970) examined the relative consistency of MFFT scores over a 2'/2-year period, from grade 1 to grade 3. The cross-time correlations were .31 for latency and .33 for error. In a study of young adolescents from age 11 to age 14, Messer and Brodzinsky (1981) reported cross-time correlations of .45 and .48
263
for latency and error, respectively. The results of studies spanning less than 2 years are not as consistent. Becker, Bender, and Morrison (1978), testing their subjects in first grade and then again 1 year later, found cross-time correlations of .46 for latency and .36 for error. In a study covering the same early school-age period, Yando and Kagan (1968) reported the cross-time correlations of latency over a 7-8-month time span to be .70 for girls and . 13 for boys, whereas for errors, the cross-time correlations were .23 for girls and .24 for boys. Kagan (1965), in correlating first-grade MFFT performance with secondgrade MFFT performance, found cross-time correlations for latency to be .50 for girls and .48 for boys, whereas for errors, the crosstime correlations were .51 for girls and .25 for boys. In evaluating these prior studies, it should be remembered that the reported longitudinal correlations are appreciably attenuated due to the unreliability of the MFFT components (see Block, 1963, 1964, and Epstein 1979, 1980, on the general and significant problem of attenuation in psychological research). Because error scores consistently show appreciably less internal consistency reliability than do latency scores (Ault, Mitchell, & Hartmann, 1976; Block et al., 1974; Kojima, 1976; Zelniker & Jeffrey, 1976), across-time consistency correlations for errors will be more attenuated than will the corresponding correlations for latencies. Relative to latency scores, then, the longitudinal consistency of error scores has therefore been underestimated in previously published studies. Applying this recognition to the already published consistency correlations, it seems clear that the error component of the MFFT is intrinsically more consistent over time than is the latency component, which was the initial basis for positing the MFFT as a measure of conceptual tempo. We turn now to our own study of the longitudinal consistency of MFFT performance. Method Subjects The subject sample included 128 children, 64 boys and 64 girls, participating in an ongoing longitudinal
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
264
P. F. GJERDE, J. BLOCK, AND J. H. BLOCK
study of ego and cognitive development initiated in 1968 at the University of California, Berkeley by Jack and Jeanne Block. (For a comprehensive description of this study, see Block & Block, 1980.) The exact number of subjects in any given analysis varies somewhat. About two thirds of the subjects are white, one quarter are black, and one twelfth are Asian. Subjects were initially recruited into the study at age 3 while either attending a university-run nursery school or a parent cooperative nursery school; they were assessed using wide-ranging batteries of measures at ages 3, 4, S, 7, 11, and 14. The MFFT was administered when the children were 3, 4, 5, and 11 years old. Subjects live primarily in urban settings and are heterogeneous with respect to social class and parent education. The analyses presented in the current study include only the 59 children, 29 girls and 30 boys, who completed the MFFT at all four age levels.
Matching Familiar Figures Test Two versions of the MFFT were administered during the preschool age. At ages 3 and 4, the version of the MFFT recommended by Kagan for use with preschool children was used. It consists of 2 practice items and 14 test items and was administered individually to each child in a familiar setting by an experimenter well known to the child. On each item, the child was shown one standard and four comparison figures and asked to select the one picture among the four comparison figures that was identical to the standard. For each item, both latency to the first response and the number of errors were recorded. For the subsequent data analysis, a composite MFFT latency score was derived by computing the mean response time for the 14 test items. A composite MFFT error score was derived by summing the errors made by a child over all the test items. At age S, the standard 12item version of the MFFT with six comparison figures was administered. The administration and scoring of the 12-item MFFT was identical to the preschool version. At age 11, two versions of the MFFT were administered. Because the 12-item version given at age 5 was recognized as possibly too easy for 11-year-old children, a second version of the MFFT, selected from the MFFT developed for use with adults by Yando and Kagan (1968), was administered in a separate session. Based on extensive pretesting, we selected 8 of the 12 Yando and Kagan items for use with our 11-year-old children. Items were included insofar as their inclusion led to an increase in the coefficient alphas of the two components of this more difficult MFFT. The administration and scoring of this eight-item MFFT was identical to the earlier versions. The MFFT20 (Cairns & Cammock, 1978), a measure also designed for older subjects, was not yet available when the 11-year assessment began. The correlation between the 12- and the 8-item MFFT versions administered at age 11 was .70 (p < .001) for latency and .55 (p < .001) for error. Given the magnitude of these intercorrelations, we decided to merge the two MFFTs. Composite MFFT latency and error scores were generated by calculating the mean latency and error scores for all the 20 test items included in the two MFFT versions administered at age 11. In subsequent analyses, only the results for this merged 20-item MFFT will be reported.
Intelligence Measures The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI) was administered to all subjects at age 4. When the children were 11 years old, they were administered the Wechsler Intelligence Scale (WISC). The intelligence tests were administered by examiners who did not participate in the collection of the MFFT data. In the sample of girls, the correlations between the WPPSI and the WISC tests across the 7 years were as follows: .68 (p < .001) for verbal IQ, .50 (p < .01) for performance IQ, and .62 (p < .001) for full scale IQ. In the sample of boys, these correlations were .64 (p < .001), .52 (p < .01), and .60 (p < .001), respectively.
Results Reliability of the MFFT Latency and Error Scores Although the internal consistency reliabilities of MFFT latency and error have always been readily calculable, they have been presented in the literature only infrequently and not before our earlier report (Block et al., 1974). In our sample, the internal consistency (coefficient alpha) reliability of MFFT latency was .86 at age 3, .89 at age 4, and .89 at age 5. At age 11, the reliability of MFFT latency was .92 for the 20-item version. For MFFT error, the internal consistency reliability was .59 at age 3, .62 at age 4, and .54 at age 5. At age 11, the reliability of the error score was .78 for the 20-item version. The higher reliability of error scores at age 11 is due to the increased length of the MFFT employed. Had a 12-item MFFT been used, the coefficient alpha at this age can be expected to have been approximately .68. These reliability coefficients are remarkably similar across the four age levels, and the higher reliabilities associated with the latency scores, compared to the error scores, are consistent with previous findings (Ault et al., 1976; Block et al., 1974; Kojima, 1976; Zelnicker & Jeffrey, 1976). Because of this difference in the coefficient alphas of the two MFFT components, error across-time coefficients are attenuated to a greater extent than are latency across-time coefficients. Mean Levels of MFFT Latency, MFFT Error, and Intelligence Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations for MFFT latency and error, per item, at each of the four different age levels.
265
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
LONGITUDINAL CONSISTENCY OF MFFT PERFORMANCE
Because three different versions of the MFFT were administered, each with a different number of items, the figures in Table 1 are descriptive only and do not permit direct cross-age comparisons, with the exception of the data available at ages 3 and 4. Comparing MFFT performance at ages 3 and 4, there is evidence, consistent with earlier studies (cf. Kogan, 1976), for increasing latencies and decreasing errors with age. When the mean levels of performance were compared for boys and girls, no significant sex differences emerged. Table 1 also reports the mean levels of performance on the WPPSI test at age 4 and the WISC test at age 11 for girls and boys separately. These IQ scores are not significantly different for the two sexes.
Relationships Between MFFT Latency and MFFT Error The latency-error correlations were all in the expected negative direction. In the sample of girls, the latency-error correlations were -.33 (p < .10) at age 3, -.29 (ns) at age 4, -.52 (p < .01) at age 5, and -.64 (p < .001) at age 11. For boys, these correlations were -.32 (p < .10) at age 3, -.22 (ns) at age 4, -.35 (/? < .10) at age 5, and -.58 (p < .001) at age 11. Relationship Between MFFT Performance and Intelligence Because the MFFT may tap abilities that are similar to those involved in performance on intelligence tests, it is important to ex-
Table 1 Descriptive Statistics for Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) and Intelligence Test Performance Girls Age
M
Boys SD
M
SD
MFFT latency 3 4 5 11
4.17 5.11 7.87 26.97
1.60 1.44 3.64 10.80
4.45 5.89 7.58 28.70
1.83 2.76 3.88 17.36
.85 .56 2.03 .63
.30 .31 .58 .43
119.93 117.60
13.73 13.76
116.54 119.67
11.99 15.43
120.27 120.37
11.41 13.99
MFFT error 3 4 5 11
.85 .50 1.81 .53
.39 .32 .58 .38 Verbal IQ
4 11
119.00 114.93
13.83 9.05 Performance IQ
4 11
115.82 120.36
13.30 13.94 Full scale IQ
4 11
119.43 119.00
12.51 11.06
Note. The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence was administered when the children were 4 years old and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale was administered when the children were 11 years old. The means and standard deviations for the two MFFT components are calculated on item level. For the sample of girls, iVs range from 27 to 29. For the sample of boys, Ns range from 26 to 30.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
266
P. F. GJERDE, J. BLOCK, AND J. H. BLOCK
amine the relationship between scores on the two types of tests. Table 2 presents the correlations between MFFT latency and error scores at ages 3,4, 5, and 11, and IQ measured at ages 4 and 11. As seen in Table 2, the relationships between IQ and MFFT latency tend to be low with one exception: At age 11, both verbal and full scale IQ are positively and strongly related to MFFT latency in boys. Relationships between IQ and MFFT error, on the other hand, are more frequently found. In the sample of girls, although verbal IQ is unrelated to MFFT error scores, negative correlations characterize the relationship between performance IQ and MFFT error. In the sample of boys, verbal IQ is unrelated to MFFT error except for age 11, whereas performance IQ is consistently negatively related to MFFT error scores.
These correlations are in general accord with earlier reported results. Consistent with Messer's review (1976), the correlations between MFFT error and IQ reported in this study are, on the average, higher than those between MFFT latency and IQ despite the greater intrinsic unreliability of the error measure. Our results are also consistent with the earlier observation by Plomin and Buss (1973) that performance IQ is more relevant than verbal IQ to MFFT performance, especially with regard to error scores. The only major exception to the Plomin and Buss pattern emerged in the male sample at age 11. In addition, it should be noted that only with regard to preschool children (age 4) are our results consistent with earlier reports as summarized by Messer (1976), which show MFFT performance to be more strongly related to intelligence in girls than in boys. At
Table 2 Relationship Between Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) Performance at Ages 3, 4, 5, and 11 and Intelligence Test Scores at Ages 4 and 11 Intelligence
MFFT
Age 4
Full scale
Performance
Verbal Age 11
Age 4
Age 11
Age 4
Age 11
Girls Latency at age 3 4 5 11 Error at age .3 4 5 11
.24 -.32 - .10 .23
.10 -.23 -.09 .24
.25 .15 .29 .02
.11 .04 -.02 -.06
.29 -.09 .23 .16
.13 -.09 -.06 .08
-.17 -.26 .07 -.32
.04 -.22 .09 -.35
-.48"'* -.40' ' -.19 -.38' '
-.30 -.42* -.27 -.31
-.36 -.37* -.06 -.41*
-.19 -.37* -.21 -.37*
Boys Latency at age 3 4 5 11 Error at age 3 4 5 11
.07 -.15 -.35 .61"*
-.09 .09 .11 .58"*
-.09 -.10 -.18 .18
.16 .20 -.03 .15
.01 -.16 -.35 .53"
.04 .18 .05 .42*
-.19 -.18 .25 -.48"
-.35 -.31 -.10 -.61"
-.26 -.21 -.30 -.19
-.57** -.48" -.18 -.65*"
-.29 -.24 .01 -.44*
-.53" -.46" -.16 -.72*"
Note. For the sample of girls, Ns range from 27 to 29. For the sample of boys, iVs range from 26 to 30. • p < .05; " p < .01; * " p < .001.
267
LONGITUDINAL CONSISTENCY OF MFFT PERFORMANCE
Table 3 Longitudinal Consistency Coefficients of MFFT Latency and MFFT Error Scores From Age 3 to Age 11 Age
Age 3
Age 4
Age 5
Age 11
.31 (.35) .18 (.20)
- . 0 2 (-.02) -.16 (-.18) .42* (.46)
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
MFFT latency 1. 2. 3. 4.
3 4 5 11
1. 2. 3. 4.
3 4 5 11
.27 (.31) .29 (.33) .09 (.10) .08 (.09)
.42* (.47) .25 (.28)
-.01 (-.01)
MFFT error .56** (.93) .44** (.73) .20 (.35) .50** (.74)
.21 (.36) .55** (.79)
.20 (.35) .30 (.52)
.17 (.25) .23 (.33) .29 (.45)
.05 (.08)
Note. MFFT = The Matching Familiar Figures Test. The correlations in parentheses are corrected for attenuation. The correlations for the sample of girls are above the diagonal, the correlations for the sample of boys are below the diagonal. The Ns for the sample of girls are 29, the TVs for the sample of boys are 30. •p < . 01.
preadolescence (age 11), our results indicate this sex-differentiated pattern is reversed. Longitudinal Consistency of MFFT Performance From Age 3 to Age 11 The longitudinal correlations for MFFT latency and MFFT error from age 3 to age 11 are presented in Table 3 separately for girls and for boys. In the female sample, for latency, the across-time coefficients ranged from —.16 to .42 with a mean of .17; for error, the acrosstime coefficients ranged from .17 to .56 with a mean of .30. In the male sample, for latency, the across-time correlations ranged from -.01 to .42 with a mean of .19; for error, the across-time coefficients ranged from .05 to .55 with a mean of .34. All mean correlations were calculated using the r to z to r transformation. In comparing the relative consistency of MFFT latency and MFFT error scores over time, it should be remembered that the longitudinal correlations of the two MFFT components have been differentially attenuated due to the much lower internal consistency reliability of error scores as compared to latency scores. When the across-time correlations are corrected for attenuation, the mean
correlations become, in the female sample, .19 for latency and .55 for error and, in the male sample, .22 for latency and .56 for error. Thus the magnitude of the corrected across-time error correlations are substantially higher than the magnitude of the corrected across-time latency correlations. To assess the influence of IQ on the longitudinal consistency of MFFT performance, each of the consistency coefficients presented in Table 3 were recalculated controlling statistically for performance IQ assessed at both age 4 and at age 11. Partialing out performance IQ had only negligible influence on the magnitude of the latency correlations. Statistically controlling for WPPSI performance IQ assessed at age 4, the average across-time latency correlations are .22 for girls and .20 for boys; statistically controlling for WISC performance IQ assessed at age 11, the average across-time latency correlations are .17 for girls and .19 for boys. The magnitudes of the across-time error coefficients, on the other hand, on the average decreased appreciably after partialing out performance IQ. Controlling for WPPSI performance IQ at age 4, the average across-time error correlations become .20 for girls and .30 for boys; controlling for WISC performance IQ at age 11, the average across-time error correlations become .22 for girls and .19 for boys.
268
P. F. GJERDE, J. BLOCK, AND J. H. BLOCK
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Discussion Our findings indicate that MFFT error scores—even when uncorrected for attenuation—are relatively consistent from age 3 to age 11. The MFFT latency coefficients, on the other hand, have considerably less implication over this period even when corrected for attenuation. Earlier studies have failed to correct MFFT scores for attenuation. Even so, long-term investigations of MFFT consistency have reported slightly higher longitudinal error coefficients than latency coefficients (Messer, 1976; Messer & Brodzinsky, 1981; Ward, 1973). In their recent report, Messer and Brodzinsky (1981) conjectured that such higher uncorrected error coefficients may be reflecting either the increased consistency of error scores in older children or the higher reliability of error scores deriving from their use of the longer MFFT20 (Cairns & Cammock, 1978). Our results do not support their interpretation, because wefindthat our subjects exhibit greater longitudinal consistency with respect to MFFT error scores than to MFFT latency scores across all ages, and further, equalized for length, the MFFT administered at age 11 is not especially more reliable than earlier forms of the MFFT. An alternative interpretation of the higher longitudinal error coefficients is that error scores reflect a relatively stable, underlying "competence" factor, whereas latency scores have only narrow, local implication (Block et al., 1974). This conjecture is strengthened in the present study by the appreciable decrease in the size of across-time error coefficients when we statistically controlled for performance IQ. The low longitudinal latency correlations create further misgivings about the reflectionimpulsivity dimension as initially conceptualized by Kagan et al. (1964). The latency score does not appear to serve well as an indicator of conceptual tempo conceived as an enduring cognitive style. As the size of the internal consistency reliability coefficients show, although the MFFT latency score is highly reliable within any one single test session, a child's response time on one occasion does not predict well response time on a second occasion. Our finding that test-
taking tempo is not longitudinally consistent across different administrations of the MFFT is congruent with thefindingsof other studies that have failed to find evidence for the generality of fast versus slow test-taking tendencies across different cognitive tasks when measured concurrently (Bartis & Ford, 1977; Bridgeman, 1980; Juliano, 1977). The MFFT error score, on the other hand, remains—despite its moderate internal consistency reliability within any one single test session—relatively consistent over time with one exception: the correlation between age 5 and age 11 for boys. Moreover, when attenuation effects are recognized, as they should be, the longitudinal consistency of error scores is substantial. In conjunction with the accumulating evidence that it is the MFFT error score that has generated the relationships surrounding the MFFT (Block et al., 1974; Bush & Dweck, 1975; Egeland, Bielke, & Kendall, 1980; Glenwick, Burko, & Barocas, 1976; Grant, 1976; Hartley, 1976; Haskins & McKinney, 1976; Mitchell & Ault, 1979; Toner, Holstein, & Hetherington, 1977), these across-time coefficients provide further evidence for the greater empirical and theoretical significance of the MFFT error component as compared to the MFFT latency component. The relationship between MFFT performance and intelligence is complex, but several important discrepancies between the results reported in this study and previously expressed assumptions about this relationship should be noted. First, Messer (1976) suggested that relationship between the MFFT and IQ is stronger in preschool than in schoolage children. The present study provided the first opportunity to assess this hypothesis longitudinally. Comparing the correlates between MFFT and IQ at preschool age (age 4) and at preadolescence (age 11), we find them to be low-to-moderate at both ages in the sample of girls. In the sample of boys, on the other hand, these correlations are, with one exception (latency scores related to performance IQ at age 11), considerably stronger in older children. Thus our results provide no evidence for an increase in the separateness of MFFT and IQ with age. Second, we note that the relationships of verbal IQ to MFFT latency and error scores
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
LONGITUDINAL CONSISTENCY OF MFFT PERFORMANCE
are approximately of equal size. This finding contradicts Kagan et al.'s (1964) assertion that latency scores are relatively independent of verbal ability and thus represent a basic cognitive style disposition. In sum, these results, deriving from the first long-term study of the longitudinal relationship between MFFT performance and intelligence, are inconsistent in important ways with the views previously put forth by Kagan and his colleagues. Instead, the high correlations reported for adolescents give added emphasis to Block et al.'s (1974) interpretation that MFFT performance is more likely due to "competence" than to "conceptual tempo." A discrepancy between the findings reported by Messer and Brodzinsky (1981) and our own results warrants comment. They found little statistical influence on longitudinal MFFT consistency of verbal IQ as measured by the verbal section of the Lorge-Thorndike test at age 11 and the verbally oriented OtisLennon test at age 14. We preferred to statistically control for performance IQ and found an appreciable influence of performance IQ on the consistency of MFFT error scores. Another consideration to be noted is that Messer and Brodzinsky (1981) obtained their intelligence information from school records, whereas in the current study, the complete WPPSI and WISC tests were administered to the subjects on an individual basis, a generally preferable procedure. The present study is the first to have examined the relationship between MFFT latency and MFFT error scores repeatedly and over a period as long as 8 years. There is an implication in our results that the two MFFT components, latency and error, shift from a relatively slight inverse relationship to a stronger inverse relationship with the passage of time. For the sample of boys, our results are in reasonable accord with Salkind and Nelson's (1980) conclusion that the magnitude of this relationship peaks at age 10, although we cannot identify the exact age level. In the sample of girls, on the other hand, the size of the inverse relationship rises markedly from age 3 to age 5 and then levels off. These results are in agreement with the evidence presented by Ward (1973), which suggests that this functional relationship emerges earlier in girls than in boys.
269
Consequent on the critique and results reported by Block et al. (1974), Kagan and Messer (1975) and Messer (1976) invoked the argument that the lower inverse correlation between latency and errors found in preschool children indicates that the MFFT is not valid as an index of reflection-impulsivity in this age group. If the magnitude of the inverse latency-error correlation is taken as a sufficient criterion for when the MFFT can be said to become a valid indicator of reflectionimpulsivity, our results indicate that, if the subjects are girls, it is of little importance whether the test is used with 5-year-olds or with 11-year-olds. Whether this criterion is a meaningful one, however, is an entirely different matter (see Block et al., 1975). Although it is arguable that low latency-error correlations are sufficient to invalidate the MFFT as an indicator of reflection-impulsivity, it does not logically follow that a high latency-error correlation therefore is a sufficient criterion for deciding whether the MFFT is a valid measure of the construct. The necessary criterion is empirical and, we must note, it remains to be demonstrated empirically whether latency-error correlations of -.50 or -.60, as compared to latency-error correlations of -.30, will provide an external pattern of correlates more supportive of the construct validity of the MFFT. The current study examined the longitudinal consistency separately for MFFT latency and error scores. Following the critique of Block et al. (1974), this differentiated analytical procedure has become increasingly common (e.g., Messer & Brodzinsky, 1981). However, conceptual tempo or reflection-impulsivity continues often to be evaluated via a conjunction of latency and error scores. For this reason, our analyses—although we have chosen not to report the specific results— included a composite MFFT index advanced by Bentler and McClain (1976) and by Salkind and Wright (1977) as a way of avoiding the statistical problems earlier noted by Block et al. (1974) and by Ault et al. (1976) as afflicting Kagan's fourfold division of subjects on the basis of double-median splits based on latency and error scores. This composite score, defined as the MFFT error score, standardized, minus the MFFT latency score, standardized, has been referred to, but not
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
270
P. F. GJERDE, J. BLOCK, AND J. H. BLOCK
justified, as a reflection-impulsivity score. Recently, it has increasingly come to replace Kagan's fourfold division of subjects as a way of evaluating the combined effects of latency and error scores. The virtue of this score is that it provides a score for each individual, whereas the traditional double-median split approach excludes many subjects from consideration with reference to Kagan's reflection-impulsivity dimension. However, this score unfortunately combines, in effect, the fast-accurate and the slow-inaccurate MFFT groups, assigning members of these groups equivalent intermediate scores. As Block et al. (1974) have shown, the fast-accurate individuals are very different from the slowinaccurate individuals and thus in solving one problem, this score has created another. Moreover, it logically follows from the psychometrics of the compositing procedure that the correlational results accruing from usage of this MFFT composite score must be intermediate to the results afforded by separate analyses of the MFFT latency and error scores. This is indeed what we found. References Ault, R. L., Mitchell, C , & Hartmann, D. P. (1976). Some methodological problems in reflection-impulsivity research. Child Development, 47, 227-231. Bartis, S. W., & Ford, L. H. (1977). Reflection-impulsivity, conservation, and the development of the ability to control cognitive tempo. Child Development, 48, 953959. Becker, L. D., Bender N. N., & Morrison, G. (1978). Measuring impulsivity-reflection: A critical review. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11, 626-632. Bentler, P. M., & McClain, J. (1976). A multitraitmultimethod analysis of reflection-impulsivity. Child Development, 47, 218-226. Block, J. (1963). The equivalence of measures and the correction for attenuation. Psychological Bulletin, 60, 152-156. Block, J. (1964). Recognizing attenuation effects in the strategy of research. Psychological Bulletin, 62, 214216. Block, J. H., & Block, J. (1980). The role of ego-control and ego-resiliency in the organization of behavior. In W. A. Collins (Ed.), Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 39-101). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Block, J., Block, J. H., & Harrington, D. M. (1974). Some misgivings about the Matching Familiar Figures Test as a measure of reflection-impulsivity. Developmental Psychology, 10, 611-632.
Block, J., Block, J. H., & Harrington, D. M. (1975). Comment on the Kagan-Messer reply. Developmental Psychology, 11, 249-252. Bridgeman, B. (1980). Generality of a "fast" or "slow" test-taking style across a variety of cognitive tasks. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17, 211-217. Bush, E. S., & Dweck, C. (1975). Reflections on conceptual tempo: Relationship between cognitive style and performance as a function of task characteristics. Developmental Psychology, 11, 567-574. Cairns, E., & Cammock, T. (1978). Development of more reliable version of the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Developmental Psychology, 5, 555-560. Egeland, B., Bielke, P., & Kendall, P. C. (1980). Achievement and adjustment correlates of the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Journal of School Psychology, 18, 361-372. Epstein, S. (1979). The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people most of the time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1097-1126. Epstein, S. (1980). The stability of behavior: II. Implications for psychological research. American Psychologist, 35, 790-806. Glenwick, D. S., Burko, A., & Barocas, R. (1976). Some interpersonal correlates of cognitive activity in fourth graders. Journal of School Psychology, 14, 212-221. Grant, R. (1976). The relation of perceptual activity to Matching Familiar Performance Test accuracy. Developmental Psychology, 12, 534-539. Hartley, D. G. (1976). The effect of perceptual saliency on reflective-impulsive performance differences. Developmental Psychology, 12, 218-225. Haskins, R. T, McKinney, J. D. (1976). Relative effects of response tempo and accuracy on problem solving and academic achievement. Child Development, 47, 690-696. Juliano, D. B. (1977). A developmental study of conceptual tempo, concept learning, and abstraction. Journal of Psychology. 96. 243-249. Kagan, J. (1965). Reflection-impulsivity and reading ability in primary grade children. Child Development, 36, 609-628. Kagan, J., & Messer, S. B. (1975). A reply to "Some misgivings about the Matching Familiar Figures Test as a measure of reflection-impulsivity." Developmental Psychology, 11, 244-248. Kagan, J., Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J., & Phillips, W. (1964). Information processing in the child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs, 78(1, Whole No. 578). Kogan, N. (1976). Cognitive styles in infancy and early childhood. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Kogan, N. (1983). Stylistic variation in childhood and adolescence: Creativity, metaphor, and cognitive style. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology. (4th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 630-706). New York: Wiley. Kojima, H. (1976). Some psychometric problems of the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 43, 731-742. Messer, S. B. (1970). Reflection-impulsivity: Stability and school failure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 487-490.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
LONGITUDINAL CONSISTENCY OF MFFT PERFORMANCE Messer, S. B. (1976). Reflection-impulsivity: A review. Psychological Bulletin. 83. 1026-1052. Messer, S. B., & Brodzinsky, D. M. (1981). Three-year stability of reflection-impulsivity in young adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 17. 848-850. Mitchell, C , & Ault, R. L. (1979). Reflection-impulsivity and the evaluation process. Child Development, 50, 1043-1049. Plomin, R., & Buss, A. H. (1973). Reflection-impulsivity and intelligence. Psychological Reports, 33, 726. Salkind, N. L., & Wright, J. C. (1977). The development of reflection-impulsivity and cognitive efficiency: An integrated model. Human Development, 20. 377-387. Salkind, N. L., & Nelson, C. F. (1980). A note on the developmental nature of reflection-impulsivity. Developmental Psychology, 16, 237-238.
271
Toner, I., Holstein, R. B., & Hetherington, E. M. (1977). Reflection-impulsivity and self-control in impulsive children. Child Development, 48, 239-245. Ward, W. C. (1973). Development of self regulatory behaviors. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Yando, R., & Kagan, J. (1968). The effect of teacher tempo on the child. Child Development, 39, 27-34. Zelniker, T, & Jeffrey, W. E. (1976). Reflective and impulsive children: Strategies of information processing underlying differences in problem solving. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 41(5, Serial No. 168).
Received November 8, 1983 Revision received January 23, 1984.
