The Tower of London (TOL) is a well-known, widely used task that captures executive function abilities. We examined the factorial structure and discriminant validity of three measures extracted from the Delis–Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) version of the TOL, namely the D-KEFS Tower Test, in 270 individuals from a publicly available release of the Enhanced Nathan Kline Institute—Rockland sample. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed a multidimensional three-factor solution of the measures extracted from the D-KEFS Tower Test; first-move-time, excess moves, and rule violations. This model was better than the unidimensional model, the two-factor model, the bifactor model and the model that included the total achievement scores. These results support the discriminant validity of the three latent factors, over their distinct relations to the total achievement score. The best fitting model was gender-invariant and age-variant. Overall, the multidimensionality of the measures extracted from the D-KEFS Tower Test reflects the need to use multiple metrics from this version of TOL to capture executive functions instead of a single score.
AlexanderL. M.EscaleraJ.AiL.AndreottiC.FebreK.MangoneA.Vega-PotlerN.LangerN.AlexanderA.KovacsM.LitkeS.O’HaganB.AndersenJ.BronsteinB.BuiA.BusheyM.ButlerH.CastagnaV.CamachoN.ChanE.. . . LitkeS. (2017). An open resource for transdiagnostic research in pediatric mental health and learning disorders. Scientific Data, 4, Article 170181. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2017.181
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., Text Revision).
3.
AndrewsG.HalfordG. S.ChappellM.MaujeanA.ShumD. H. (2014). Planning following stroke: A relational complexity approach using the Tower of London. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 1032, 48-61. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.01032
4.
ArbuckleJ. L. (2014). Amos (Version 23.0) [Computer Program]. IBM SPSS.
5.
BagshawR.GrayN. S.SnowdenR. J. (2014). Executive function in psychopathy: The tower of London, Brixton spatial anticipation and the Hayling sentence completion tests. Psychiatry Research, 220(1-2), 483-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.07.031
6.
BentlerP. M.SatorraA. (2010). Testing model nesting and equivalence. Psychological Methods, 15(2), 111-123. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019625
7.
BergW. K.ByrdD. L. (2002). The tower of London spatial problem-solving task: Enhancing clinical and research implementation. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24(5), 586-604. https://doi.org/10.1076/jcen.24.5.586.1006
8.
ByrneB. M. (2009). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, programming, and applications (2nd ed.). Routledge.
9.
ByrneB. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge.
10.
ByrneG.CharltonM.FotheringhamS. (2009). Multiple dependent hypothesis tests in geographically weighted regression. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on GeoComputation. University of New South Wales. https://mural.maynoothuniversity.ie/5768/1/MC_multiple%20dependent.pdf
11.
CareyC. L.WoodsS. P.DamonJ.HalabiC.DeanD.DelisD. C.MillerB. L.KramerJ. H. (2008). Discriminant validity and neuroanatomical correlates of rule monitoring in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychologia, 46(4), 1081-1087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.11.001
12.
CulbertsonW. C.ZillmerE. A. (1998). The construct validity of the Tower of London DX as a measure of the executive functioning of ADHD children. Assessment, 5(3), 215-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/107319119800500302
13.
D’AntuonoG.La TorreF. R.MarinD.AntonucciG.PiccardiL.GuarigliaC. (2017). Role of working memory, inhibition, and fluid intelligence in the performance of the Tower of London task. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 24(6), 548-558. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2016.1225071
14.
DasJ. P.MisraS. B. (2014). Cognitive planning and executive functions: Applications in management and education. Sage.
15.
DebelakR.EgleJ.KallerC. P.KösteringL. (2016). Assessment of planning ability: Psychometric analyses on the unidimensionality and construct validity of the tower of london task (TOL-F). Neuropsychology, 30(3), 346-360. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000238
16.
DelisD. C.KaplanE.KramerJ. H. (2001). The Delis-Kaplan executive function system: Examiner’s manual. Psychological Corporation.
17.
DunnT. J.BaguleyT.BrunsdenV. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399-412. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12046
18.
GeorgiouG. K.LiJ.DasJ. P. (2017). Tower of London: What level of planning does it measure?Psychological Studies, 62(3), 261-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-017-0416-8
19.
GilhoolyK. J.WynnV.PhilipsL. H.LlogieR. H.Della SalaS. (2002). Visuo-spatial and verbal working memory in the five-disc Tower of London task: An individual differences approach. Thinking & Reasoning, 8(3), 165-178. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780244000006
20.
HodgettsH. M.JonesD. M. (2006). Interruption of the Tower of London task: Support for a goal-activation approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(1), 103-115. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.135.1.103
21.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
22.
JonesG.MackenB. (2015). Questioning short-term memory and its measurement: Why digit span measures long-term associative learning. Cognition, 144, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.07.009
23.
JuradoM. B.RosselliM. (2007). The elusive nature of executive functions: A review of our current understanding. Neuropsychology Review, 17(3), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-007-9040-z
24.
KallerC. P.DebelakR.KösteringL.EgleJ.RahmB.WildP. S.BlettnerM.BeutelM. E.UnterrainerJ. M. (2016). Assessing planning ability across the adult life span: Population-representative and age-adjusted reliability estimates for the Tower of London (TOL-F). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 31(2), 148-164. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acv088
25.
KallerC. P.UnterrainerJ. M.StahlC. (2012). Assessing planning ability with the Tower of London task: Psychometric properties of a structurally balanced problem set. Psychological Assessment, 24(1), 46-53. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025174
26.
KaryotakiM.DrigasA.SkianisC. (2017). Attentional control and other executive functions. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 12(03), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v12i03.6587
KlineR. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
29.
LaiK. (2018). Estimating standardized SEM parameters given nonnormal data and incorrect model: Methods and comparison. Structural Equation Modeling, 25(4), 600-620. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2017.1392248
30.
LaiK.GreenS. B. (2016). The problem with having two watches: Assessment of fit when RMSEA and CFI disagree. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51(2-3), 220-239. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2015.1134306
31.
LarochetteA.BennK.HarrisonA. G. (2009). Executive functioning: A comparison of the Tower of LondonDX and the D-KEFS Tower Test. Applied Neuropsychology, 16(4), 275-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/09084280903098695
32.
LatzmanR. D.MarkonK. E. (2010). The factor structure and age-related factorial invariance of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS). Assessment, 17(2), 172-184. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191109356254
33.
LeontyevA. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Pergamon Press.
34.
LucianaM.CollinsP. F.OlsonE. A.SchisselA. M. (2009). Tower of London performance in healthy adolescents: The development of planning skills and associations with self-reported inattention and impulsivity. Developmental Neuro-psychology, 34(4), 461-475. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565640902964540
35.
MacAllisterW. S. (2010). Multiple sclerosis in children and adolescents: Neurocognitive disorders. In RivaD.NjiokiktjienC. (Eds.), Brain lesion localization and developmental functions: Basal ganglia, connecting systems, cerebellum, mirror neurons (pp. 81-88). John Libbey Eurotext.
36.
MattsonS. N.GoodmanA. M.CaineC.DelisD. C.RileyE. P. (1999). Executive functioning in children with heavy prenatal alcohol exposure. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 23(11), 1808-1815. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.1999.tb04077.x
37.
MichalecJ.BezdicekO.NikolaiT.HarsaP.JechR.SilhanP.HyzaM.RuzickaE.ShalliceT. (2017). A comparative study of Tower of London scoring systems and normative data. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 32(3), 328-338. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw111
38.
MiyakeA.FriedmanN. P.EmersonM. J.WitzkiA. H.HowerterA.WagerT. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49-100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
NaglieriJ. A.DasJ. P. (1997). Das-Naglieri cognitive assessment system. Riverside.
41.
NarayananA. (2012). A review of eight software packages for structural equation modeling. The American Statistician, 66(2), 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2012.708641
42.
NoonerK. B.ColcombeS.TobeR.MennesM.BenedictM.MorenoA.PanekL. J.BrownS.ZavitzS. T.LiQ.SikkaS.GutmanD.BangaruS.SchlachterR. T.KamielS. M.AnwarA. R.HinzC. M.KaplanM. S.RachlinA. B.. . . MilhamM. P. (2012). The NKI-Rockland sample: A model for accelerating the pace of discovery science in psychiatry. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 6, 152-163. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2012.00152
43.
PhamT. H.VanderstukkenO.PhilippotP.VanderlindenM. (2003). Selective attention and executive functions deficits among criminal psychopaths. Aggressive Behavior, 29(5), 393-405. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.10051
44.
PhillipsL. H.WynnV. E.McphersonS.GilhoolyK. J. (2001). Mental planning and the Tower of London task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 54(2), 579-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755977
45.
PiresL.MouraO.GuerriniC.BuekenhoutI.SimõesM. R.LeitãoJ. (2019). Confirmatory factor analysis of neurocognitive measures in healthy Young adults: The relation of executive functions with other neurocognitive functions. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 34(3), 350-365. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acy040
46.
R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
47.
RiccioC. A.WolfeM. E.RomineC.DavisB.SullivanJ. R. (2004). The Tower of London and neuropsychological assessment of ADHD in adults. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19(5), 661-671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2003.09.001
48.
SahakianB. J.OwenA. M. (1992). Computerized assessment in neuropsychiatry using CANTAB: Discussion paper. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 85(7), 399-402.
49.
ShalliceT. (1982). Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, Biological Sciences, 298(1089), 199-209.
50.
SteinbergL. (2010). A dual systems model of adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Psychobiology, 52(3), 216-224. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20445
51.
Trizano-HermosillaI.AlvaradoJ. M. (2016). Best alternatives to Cronbach’s alpha reliability in realistic conditions: Congeneric and asymmetrical measurements. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 769-787. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00769
52.
UnterrainerJ. M.RahmB.KallerC. P.WildP. S.MünzelT.BlettnerM.LacknerK.PfeifferN.BeutelM. E. (2019). Assessing planning ability across the adult life span in a large population-representative sample: Reliability estimates and normative data for the Tower of London (TOL-F) task. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 25(5), 520-529. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617718001248
53.
UsaiM. C.ViterboriP.TraversoL.De FranchisV. (2014). Latent structure of executive function in five- and six-year-old children: A longitudinal study. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 11(4), 447-462. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2013.840578
54.
WardG.AllportA. (1997). Planning and problem solving using the five disc Tower of London task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 50(1), 49-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755681
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
