A major research limitation in investigating the validity of the TAIS has been the failure to distinguish when attentional style has an effect on the information processing system, early as in encoding or late after processing. Few investigations have examined the TAIS predictive validity in a controlled setting wherein task attention demands can be systematically and accurately varied. Does the general trait of attentional style really have anything to do with how attention related information is processed? The present study examined this question using a valid attention theory (Treisman's feature integration theory) and a visual search paradigm. When the TAIS attentional-style scales were correlated with visual search rate for attention demanding targets, no significant relationships were observed. Specifically, TAIS scales did not relate to visual search rate for an attention demanding target, the performance of subjects extreme in search rate, or the central to peripheral slowing of search time in target detection. The factorial validity of the TAIS was also questioned. It was concluded that the attentional-style scales were not valid in predicting how attention related visual information is processed. The importance of distinguishing when attentional style might be operating in the information processing system was emphasized for future research.
Deborah Dewey and Lawrence R. Brawley
Brenda N. Wilson, Bonnie J. Kaplan, Susan G. Crawford and Deborah Dewey
To examine the reliability of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-Long Form (BOTMP-LF), approximately 40 therapists completed a questionnaire on the administration and scoring of this test (72% response rate). A large degree of inconsistency between therapists was found. This prompted a study of interrater reliability of six therapists who received rigorous training on the BOTMP-LF. Results indicated that consistency of scoring between testers was statistically high for the battery, composite, and subtest scores. However, item-by-item agreement was low for many items, and agreement between raters on their diagnosis of the children as having motor problems was only fair to good. There was no difference in interrater reliability of the test for children with and without learning, attentional, or motor coordination problems. Some limitations of the BOTMP-LF are apparent from these studies.