Psycholinguistic features, design attributes, and respondent-reported cognition predict response time to patient-reported outcome measure items
Open Access
- 8 February 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Quality of Life Research
- Vol. 30 (6), 1693-1704
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02778-5
Abstract
Purpose Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) vary in their psycholinguistic complexity. This study examined whether response time to PROM items is related to psycholinguistic attributes of the item and/or the self-reported cognitive ability of the respondent. Methods Baseline data from Wave 2 of the Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (Neuro-QoL) development study were reanalyzed. That sample contained 581 adults with neurological disorders and whose self-reported cognitive abilities were quantified by the Neuro-QoL v2.0 Cognitive Function Item Bank. 185 Neuro-QoL items were coded for several psycholinguistic variables and design attributes: number of words and syllables, mean imageability of words, mean word frequency, mean age of word acquisition, and response format (e.g., about symptom frequency or task difficulty). Data were analyzed with linear and generalized linear mixed models. Results Main effects models revealed that slower response times were associated with respondents with lower self-reported cognitive abilities and with PROM items that contained more syllables, less imageable (e.g., more abstract) words, and that asked about task difficulty rather than symptom frequency. Interaction effects were found between self-reported cognition and those same PROM attributes such that people with worse self-reported cognitive abilities were disproportionately slow when responding to items that were longer (more syllables), contained less imageable words, and asked about task difficulty. Conclusion Completing a PROM requires multiple cognitive skills (e.g., memory, executive functioning) and appraisal processes. Response time is a means of operationalizing the amount or difficulty of cognitive processing, and this report indicates several aspects of PROM design that relate to a measure’s cognitive burden. However, future research with better experimental control is needed.Keywords
This publication has 41 references indexed in Scilit:
- Neuro-QOLNeurology, 2012
- Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30,000 English wordsBehavior Research Methods, 2012
- Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2012
- The development of a clinical outcomes survey research application: Assessment CenterSMQuality of Life Research, 2010
- Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American EnglishBehavior Research Methods, 2009
- Cognitive burden of survey questions and response times: A psycholinguistic experimentApplied Cognitive Psychology, 2009
- Evaluation of Item CandidatesMedical Care, 2007
- Asking questions about behavior: cognition, communication, and questionnaire constructionAmerican Journal of Evaluation, 2001
- Deep dyslexia: A case study of connectionist neuropsychologyCognitive Neuropsychology, 1993
- Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1984