Applying the purdue pegboard to evaluate precision assembly performance

Ten participants were recruited in the Purdue Pegboard test and the precision assembly task. Data was collected through ten repetitive trials of each test. How the learning effect might influence the actual assessment was checked. ANOVA results showed that difference between groups was significant for the precision assembly task (p<;0.05), the Purdue Pegboard Right Hand Subtest (p<;0.05)) and Assembly Subtest (p<;0.05). Fisher's LSD procedures further pointed out the learning effect, where after the 6th trial, there was stable performance on the Purdue Pegboard Right Hand Subtest. Similarly, the Assembly Subtest became steady after the third trial, while the precision assembly task required at least six practice sets. The score results, excluded from the impact of the learning effect, were later examined by the Pearson correlation coefficient. Participants with higher scores on the Purdue Pegboard Assembly and Both Hands Subtest generally spent less time on the precision assembly task.