Implementing this approach would require estimating individual latent speeds using observed response times as indicators and item time intensity parameters obtained from a sample of engaged test-takers.
We offer an alternative interpretation of the latent increase in speed, similar to the one we offered for accuracy.
Furthermore, models of change in speed on which predictions of overnight latent enhancement are based [6] fail to fully account for important changes in speed that take place over the course of training itself.
The measurement component of our model was first created, in which the latent variable of memory/processing speed functions was specified by the manifest variables processing speed/working memory, auditory memory, and visual memory.
Similarly, a hypothetical elder who is at the mean for the physical functioning latent variable has a gait speed of 0.59 m/sec and grip strength is 40.75 kg, whereas an elder who has a value 1 SD below the mean has a gait speed of 0.48 m/sec and grip strength of 18.75 kg, and an elder who is 1 SD above the mean has a gait speed of 0.72 m/sec and grip strength is 64.5 kg.
Nevertheless, we showed that our model reduced spatial errors by 40 50% compared to classic speed filter+interpolation methods, with a vast majority of latent (i.e. estimated but not directly recorded) locations being within 10 km of true position.
And then, first order linear regression equations were derived to estimate the enthalpy wheel sensible and latent effectiveness at normal operating rotational speeds (i.e. over 20 rpm).
Collectively, these results suggested that our memory/processing speed model was adequately operationalized by successfully identifying variables and latent factor that were clearly related.
Consistent with our accuracy data and with past reports of speed on the finger-tapping task, we also observed a significant, latent overnight sleep-dependent increase in speed (Fig. 1B, blue box bracket), from 24.5 sequences on the final pre-sleep trial to 26.6 sequences on the first post-sleep trial (F 1,43) = 12.58; P<0.0012.58
