Descriptive analysis of the test of everyday attention for children in a Spanish normative sample

Introduction. Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch) has been validated in different countries demonstrating that it is an instrument with a correct balance between reliability and duration. Given the shortage of trustworthy instruments of evaluation in our language for infantile population we decide to explore the Spanish version of the TEA-Ch. Methods. We administered TEA-Ch (version A) to a sample control of 133 Spanish children from 6 to 11 years enrolled in school in the Community of Madrid. Four children were selected at random by course of Primary Education, distributing the sex of equivalent form. Descriptive analysis and comparison by ages and sex in each of the TEA-Ch's subtests were conducted to establish a profile of the sample. In order to analyze the effect of the age, subjects were grouped in six sub-samples: 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 years-old. Results. This first descriptive analysis demonstrates age exerted a significant effect on each measure, due to an important "jump" in children's performance between 6 and 7 years-old. The effect of sex was significant only in two visual attention measures (Sky Search & Map) and interaction age and sex exerted a significant effect only in the dual task (Score DT). Conclusions. The results suggest that the Spanish version of the TEA-Ch (A) might be a useful instrument to evaluate attentional processes in Spanish child population.

The left visual field attentional advantage: No evidence of different speeds of processing across visual hemifields.

Temporal-order judgment (TOJ) and simultaneity judgment (SJ) tasks are used to study differences in speed of processing across sensory modalities, stimulus types, or experimental conditions. Matthews and Welch (2015) reported that observed performance in SJ and TOJ tasks is superior when visual stimuli are presented in the left visual field (LVF) compared to the right visual field (RVF), revealing an LVF advantage presumably reflecting attentional influences. Because observed performance reflects the interplay of perceptual and decisional processes involved in carrying out the tasks, analyses that separate out these influences are needed to determine the origin of the LVF advantage. We re-analyzed the data of Matthews and Welch (2015) using a model of performance in SJ and TOJ tasks that separates out these influences. Parameter estimates capturing the operation of perceptual processes did not differ between hemifields by these analyses, whereas parameter estimates capturing the operation of decisional processes differed. In line with other evidence, perceptual processing also did not differ between SJ and TOJ tasks. Thus, the LVF advantage occurs with identical speeds of processing in both visual hemifields. If attention is responsible for the LVF advantage, it does not exert its influence via prior entry.