Luria's fist-edge-palm test: A small change makes a big difference.

Slight modifications in the instructions or administration of neuropsychological tests could result in noticeable differences in performance. A good example is offered by a test devised by Luria to assess executive functioning in motor planning, the three-step fist-edge-palm (FEP) test, which is still frequently employed in clinical settings and features in several neuropsychological test batteries such as the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB). While Luria described the orientation of the fist as horizontal to the testing desk (hFEP), recent versions of the task indicate the fist should be vertical to the testing desk (vFEP). The current study examined whether administering the hFEP or the vFEP tests results in different performance in healthy people, and whether one version is better than the other at detecting impairments in a patient population. The hFEP proved more challenging for healthy adults than the vFEP, and people with brain damage committed more errors on the hFEP than the vFEP. Both versions correlated with executive measures but also with several other cognitive variables, indicating that the test is not a specific marker of executive functions. Although performance on the FEP is sensitive to articulatory suppression, faster pace, and the number of sequences performed, none of these conditions fully account for the differences between the hFEP and vFEP. The additional demand of the hFEP appears to be due to the less natural (i.e., automatic) orientation of the horizontal fist. In conclusion, a small change in the administration of the test, eluding Luria's instructions, grossly modified its sensitivity. Clinicians and researchers should be wary of modifying instructions or testing procedures without considering the possible consequences of such modifications.

The FACE test: a new neuropsychological task to assess the recognition of complex mental states from faces.

BACKGROUND: Social cognition deficits are reported in several neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's disease (PD). However, the availability of tasks for the clinical assessment is still limited, preventing the full characterization of socio-cognitive dysfunctions in neurological patients. This study aims to present a new task to assess the recognition of complex mental states from faces (FACE test), reporting normative data for the Italian population and an example of its clinical application to 40 PD patients. METHODS: Two-hundred twenty-nine Italian participants with at least 5 years of education were enrolled. Data were analyzed according to the method of equivalent scores; test-retest reliability and convergent validity were assessed. Two short versions of the FACE test were defined for clinical and research purposes. The prevalence of deficits in the FACE test was computed in the PD sample, as well as correlations with cognitive performance and diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Regression analyses revealed significant effects of demographic variables on FACE performance, with younger and more educated individuals showing higher scores. Twenty-eight percent of PD patients showed borderline/pathological performance, which was correlated with emotion recognition/attribution abilities, and attentive-executive functions. The FACE test was accurate (80%) in distinguishing PD patients with socio-cognitive dysfunctions from both controls and PD patients without emotion recognition/attribution difficulties. CONCLUSION: The FACE test represents a new tool assessing the ability to recognize complex mental states from facial expressions. Overall, these results support its use in both clinical and research settings, as well as the presence of affective processing deficits in a subsample of PD patients.