Screening method for assessing verbal learning efficiency using the Cognistat.

The Cognistat is a widely used neurobehavioral screening instrument that addresses functioning across multiple domains. Unlike many popular neuropsychological tests, the Cognistat does not currently assess learning efficiency for verbal material. The purpose of this study was to develop a screening method for assessing verbal learning efficiency with the Cognistat, investigate the effects of two demographic variables (age and gender) on performance, and to establish cutoff scores for impairment. Participants were 253 volunteers between the ages of 18 and 96 years. Participants were classified into two age groups: 18-64 years and 65 + years. The data revealed a significant age and gender performance difference. Implications for the present findings and for future research are presented.

Societal attitudes influence performance on the Cognistat Judgment subtest.

The Cognistat is a widely used screening instrument for assessing cognitive functioning. However, the manualized scoring guidelines for one of the questions in the Judgment subtest appear insensitive to responses when examinees answer in light of current societal attitudes. Penalization of examinees is likely to lead to an underestimation of functional ability and a decrease in test validity. Suggestions for correcting this issue are presented.

Utility of the Cognistat Judgment Subtest in Motorically Impaired Populations.

The Cognistat is one the most frequently employed measures to briefly evaluate cognitive functioning. However, clinical experience indicates that the questions within the Judgment subtest may be biased and insensitive toward persons with motor impairments. These issues may impact the examinee's performance and decrease the validity of the test-not to mention possibly create undue emotional distress. Suggestions for rectifying these issues are presented.

Effect of Left-Hand Peg Placement Direction on the Grooved Pegboard Test.

Clinical experience has shown that examinees performing the Grooved Pegboard Test frequently have difficulty maintaining the manualized right-to-left placement direction with their left hand. To date, no empirical study has examined this phenomenon. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether left-hand peg placement direction (right-to-left vs. left-to-right) influences performance on this standardized test of fine motor speed and dexterity. The participants were 66 male and female student volunteers aged 18 to 58 years old. None of the participants had a history of neurologic disease/trauma or conditions that would affect motor functioning of the right and left upper extremities. Data were analyzed using a two-way mixed-design analysis of covariance. Results revealed a significant main effect for gender, F(1, 62) = 5.638, p = .021. Of primary interest was the main effect for placement direction, which was not significant, F(1, 62) = 0.108, p = .744. No significant interaction was observed, F(1, 62) = 0.002, p = .964.

Comparison of the WRAT4 reading subtest and the WTAR for estimating premorbid ability level.

The need to estimate premorbid ability level as part of a neuropsychological evaluation is well understood in the profession. The purpose of this study was to evaluate two popular reading tests for estimating premorbid ability. Participants were 102 undergraduate volunteers between the ages of 18 and 64 years (M = 25.89 years, SD = 9.54). Participants completed the Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) and both forms of the Reading subtest of the Wide Range Achievement Test-Fourth Edition (WRAT4). The WTAR was scored using the Predicted Full-Scale IQ (FSIQ) and the Demographic Predicted FSIQ methods presented in the manual. Repeated-measures analyses of variance revealed no significant difference between the two forms of the WRAT4 and the WTAR for both the Predicted FSIQ, F(2, 202) = 0.399, p = .671, and the Demographic Predicted FSIQ, F(2, 190) = 0.085, p = .918, scoring approaches. Concurrent validity correlation coefficients between the three items using the Predicted FSIQ ranged from r = .75 to r = .78; using the Demographic Predicted FSIQ, coefficients ranged from r = .50 to r = .76. Our data suggest that the WTAR offers a slightly more reliable statistical portrait of cognitive functioning, especially with a more educated and originally higher-functioning population.

Correcting for gender on the Cognistat Judgment subtest.

The Cognistat is a widely used screening instrument for the assessment of higher cerebral functioning. This study investigated the effects of gender and age on a specific item from the metric sequence of the Cognistat Judgment subtest. Participants consisted of 110 cognitively intact volunteers (45 males, 65 females). Results showed that females responded with 1-point answers, as defined by the manual, significantly more often than those who responded with a manual-defined 2-point response. Males responded with a 2-point answer with a significantly greater frequency than they responded with 1-point responses. The data indicate that a gender correction for females should be made to the Judgment subtest of the Cognistat.

Initial category cues and recognition memory foils for the Cognistat Verbal Memory alternate word list.

The Cognistat is a widely used screening instrument for the evaluation of higher cerebral functioning. The Verbal Memory subtest contains an alternate word list without the cuing (i.e., category prompts) and recognition stimuli presented with the primary word list. This leaves the examiner responsible for creating nonstandardized category cues and recognition memory foils when the alternate task is employed. We developed a categorization questionnaire to obtain cuing and recognition items for the alternate word list. Two groups of participants were evaluated: a young sample (n = 518) and an elderly sample (n = 43). Data for the cuing and recognition phases of the alternate verbal memory word list are presented.

Rectifying the inconsistent administration procedures of the Cognistat constructional ability subtest.

The Cognistat is one of the most widely used psychometric instruments to quickly assess higher cerebral functioning. However, when administered according to the manual, the constructional ability subtest yields results that are confounded by other cognitive processes, as well as blemished by intra-test inconsistencies. Such issues decrease the validity, and ultimately the utility, of this screening device. Suggestions for rectifying these shortcomings are presented.