IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v114y2026ics0160289625000911.html

Investigating retest effects in cognitive ability tests: An operation-specific approach

Author

Listed:
  • Pallentin, Vanessa S.
  • Rummel, Jan
  • Danner, Daniel

Abstract

The term “retest effects” refers to score gains on cognitive ability as well as educational achievement tests upon repeated administration of the same or a similar test. Previous research on this phenomenon has focused mainly on general cognitive ability scores—often using manifest difference scores—and has neglected differences in retest effects across different types of cognitive operations underlying general cognitive abilities. Additionally, these studies have focused primarily on average group-level test scores, neglecting interindividual differences in retest effects. To address these gaps, we used latent growth curve modeling to examine retest effects in N = 203 participants across three test sessions, considering both general cognitive ability and its four underlying operations according to the Berlin intelligence structure model, namely, processing capacity, processing speed, creativity, and memory. Results show a linear improvement in overall performance of 53.60 points (about 10.45 IQ points) with each assessment, corresponding to two thirds of a standard deviation. Participants' slopes—that is, their rates of improvement across test sessions—did not vary significantly, and thus did not correlate with their initial cognitive ability levels. Statistically significant operation-specific differences in the magnitude of retest effects were found, with memory showing the largest retest effect and creativity the smallest. Although participants did not vary in their rates of improvement on the processing-capacity and memory operation, there was significant interindividual variation in the slopes of the other two operations. These findings highlight the importance of considering operation-specific scores in research on retest effects. Implications for cognitive ability retesting practices are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Pallentin, Vanessa S. & Rummel, Jan & Danner, Daniel, 2026. "Investigating retest effects in cognitive ability tests: An operation-specific approach," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:114:y:2026:i:c:s0160289625000911
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2025.101988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000911
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2025.101988?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schneider, Benedikt & Becker, Nicolas & Krieger, Florian & Spinath, Frank M. & Sparfeldt, Jörn R., 2020. "Teaching the underlying rules of figural matrices in a short video increases test scores," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    2. Arendasy, Martin E. & Sommer, Markus, 2017. "Reducing the effect size of the retest effect: Examining different approaches," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 89-98.
    3. Peter, J Paul & Churchill, Gilbert A, Jr & Brown, Tom J, 1993. "Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(4), pages 655-662, March.
    4. Scharfen, Jana & Peters, Judith Marie & Holling, Heinz, 2018. "Retest effects in cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 44-66.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sommer, Markus & Arendasy, Martin E. & Punter, Joachim Fritz & Feldhammer-Kahr, Martina & Rieder, Anita, 2025. "Does test preparation mediate the effect of parents' level of educational attainment on medical school admission test performance?," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Schneider, Benedikt & Sparfeldt, Jörn R., 2021. "How to solve number series items: Can watching video tutorials increase test scores?," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    3. Arendasy, Martin E. & Sommer, Markus & Tschiesner, Reinhard & Feldhammer-Kahr, Martina & Umdasch, Konstantin, 2024. "Using automatic item generation to construct scheduling problems measuring planning ability," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. Son K. Lam & Thomas E. DeCarlo & Ashish Sharma, 2019. "Salesperson ambidexterity in customer engagement: do customer base characteristics matter?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 659-680, July.
    5. Sang-June Park & Youjae Yi, 2016. "Performance-only measures vs. performance-expectation measures of service quality," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(15-16), pages 741-756, December.
    6. Mansukoski, Liina & Bogin, Barry & Galvez-Sobral, J. Andres & Furlán, Luis & Johnson, William, 2020. "Differences and secular trends in childhood IQ trajectories in Guatemala City," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    7. Söderlund, Magnus & Sagfossen, Sofie, 2017. "The consumer experience: The impact of supplier effort and consumer effort on customer satisfaction," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 219-229.
    8. Pierre Berthon & Leyland Pitt & Michael Ewing & Christopher L. Carr, 2002. "Potential Research Space in MIS: A Framework for Envisioning and Evaluating Research Replication, Extension, and Generation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 416-427, December.
    9. Rosanna Giannoccaro & Nicola Costantino & A. Ludovico & Roberto Pietroforte, 2008. "Measuring Citizen Satisfaction with Aspects of Public Services from a Local Authority and Determining Their Importance: A Case Study," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Volker Seiler, 2013. "Comment on Ameriks, Caplin, Leahy & Tyler (2007): Measuring Self-Control Problems," Working Papers CIE 61, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
    11. Harrington, Karra D. & Dang, Christa & Lim, Yen Ying & Ames, David & Laws, Simon M. & Pietrzak, Robert H. & Rainey-Smith, Stephanie & Robertson, Joanne & Rowe, Christopher C. & Salvado, Olivier & Vill, 2018. "The effect of preclinical Alzheimer's disease on age-related changes in intelligence in cognitively normal older adults," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 22-29.
    12. Homburg, Christian & Rudolph, Bettina, 2001. "Customer satisfaction in industrial markets: dimensional and multiple role issues," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 15-33, April.
    13. Davern, Michael J. & Wilkin, Carla L., 2010. "Towards an integrated view of IT value measurement," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 42-60.
    14. Pedro Nuñez-Cacho & Jaroslaw Górecki & Valentín Molina-Moreno & Francisco A. Corpas-Iglesias, 2018. "What Gets Measured, Gets Done: Development of a Circular Economy Measurement Scale for Building Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, July.
    15. Nicole Koschate-Fischer & Wayne D. Hoyer & Nicola E. Stokburger-Sauer & Jan Engling, 2018. "Do life events always lead to change in purchase? The mediating role of change in consumer innovativeness, the variety seeking tendency, and price consciousness," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 516-536, May.
    16. M. Sirgy & David Efraty & Phillip Siegel & Dong-Jin Lee, 2001. "A New Measure of Quality of Work Life (QWL) Based on Need Satisfaction and Spillover Theories," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 241-302, September.
    17. Zeynep Müge Güzel & Aysegul Ozsomer, 2022. "Cleansing the doors of perception: Perceptual inaccuracy in marketing relationships," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 12(3), pages 216-237, December.
    18. Güzel, Zeynep Müge & Özsomer, Ayşegül & Sezen, Burcu, 2025. "Mind the standardization gap: An emerging market phenomenon," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    19. Luis L. Martins, 2005. "A Model of the Effects of Reputational Rankings on Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 701-720, December.
    20. Jonathan D. Bohlmann & José Antonio Rosa & Ruth N. Bolton & William J. Qualls, 2006. "The Effect of Group Interactions on Satisfaction Judgments: Satisfaction Escalation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 301-321, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:114:y:2026:i:c:s0160289625000911. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.