Effects of Testing Conditions on Piaget Matrices and Order of Appearance Problems: A Study of Competence versus Performance.

The presence or absence of a correct response to a task presented in a psychological assessment situation is usually taken as an indication of the presence or absence of the capability under study. Since it is possible for negative, incorrect responses to be due to factors such as lack of understanding or misunderstanding of the question and task demands, forgetting, or application of inappropriate solution strategies, Type II error is possible. Type I error may occur if correct solution is obtained through faulty means such as by guessing, use of irrelevant procedures, and so on (Smedslund, 1969). The problem of accurately assessing capabilities that may be present but not fully consolidated or general enough to extend to the demands of the task is an issue of special importance to cognitive theories which employ the use of constructs such as schemes or structures. Flavell and Wohlwill (1969) point out, for example, the appropriateness of the competence-performance distinction in studying Piaget developmental phenomena. They refer to intellectual competence as an individual's "true" level or ability. It is a theoretical level inasmuch as it cannot be measured directly, but can only be approximated by an individual's performance on a set of tasks. The extent to which intraand extra-individual factors may interfere with maximum performance determines the magnitude of the discrepancy between what one can do (competence) and what one actually does (performance). Studies dealing with the relationship between cognitive competence and performance in normal children point to the general conclusion that performance levels under particular conditions are often less than perfect indicators of capacity (Birch & Bortner, 1966; Clarke, Clarke, & Cooper, 1970; Overton & Brodzinsky, 1972). The main purpose of the present study was to investigate the possibility of affecting levels of performance by varying testing procedure on two Piaget tasks, measuring different aspects of concrete operational thought. A second goal was to relate the scores obtained to school achievement and achievement-potential data. Transitional age children were used as subjects as they are at the point where divergence between competence and performance, in the sense described, is most likely to be maximal. Subparts of a standardized test of cognitive development (Winkelmann, 1975) were used so that performance under the standardized conditions could be compared with that under a condition designed to involve the child in active participation with the test materials. In the latter, emphasis was placed on dialogue and interaction between the tester and testee so that a "real life" situation was developed, one in which the child was not alienated. This is in keeping with a concern raised by Riegel (1975). He suggests that "objective," standardized approaches to test administration should be abandoned in favor of a type of situation which a child actually encounters in everyday life, one in which the child is given feedback, is asked and can ask questions, and is helped to understand the