California Verbal Learning Test

Last updated
California Verbal Learning Test
Purposemeasures episodic verbal learning

The California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) [1] is one of the most widely used neuropsychological tests in North America. As an instrument, it represents a relatively new approach to clinical psychology and the cognitive science of memory. It measures episodic verbal learning and memory, and demonstrates sensitivity to a range of clinical conditions. [2] The test does this by attempting to link memory deficits with impaired performance on specific tasks. It assesses encoding, recall and recognition in a single modality of item presentation (auditory-verbal). The CVLT is considered to be a more sensitive measure of episodic memory than other verbal learning tests. It was designed to not only measure how much a subject learned, but also reveal strategies employed and the types of errors made. The CVLT indexes free and cued recall, serial position effects (including primacy and recency), semantic clustering, intrusions, interference and recognition. Delis et al. (1994) released the California Verbal Learning Test for Children (CVLT-C). The California Verbal Learning Test-II (CVLT-II) is an updated version of the original CVLT, which has been standardized and provides normative data.

Contents

Measures

CVLT [1] generates a wide variety of measures:

Administration

The original CVLT was normed on a 'reference sample' of 273 nonclinical subjects. [3]

The experimenter reads a list of 16 nouns aloud, at one-second intervals, in fixed order, over five learning trials (list A). After each trial, the subject is asked to recall as many words as they can in any order (i.e., free recall).

A big feature, compared to other verbal learning tests, is that the words are drawn from four semantic categories (tools, fruits, clothing, spices and herbs), with no consecutive words from the same category. If a subject 'clusters' words from a category together, it is probable that they are using semantic organisation.

An interference list (list B) is presented that shares two categories from List A (e.g., fruit and tools) and has two unshared categories (e.g., fish and kitchen utensils). However, neither list uses common words for a specific category (e.g., apples used rather than bananas). Free and cued recall of list A are tested immediately (short-delay), and again after 20 minutes (long-delay). In cued recall, the experimenter prompts the subjects with the word category.

The CVLT ends with a recognition task, where the experimenter presents the subject with a 44-word list, and the subject must indicate whether it is a target word or a distractor. Some distractors share semantic categories with the target words while others sound alike. The 44-word list is presented like shopping list as it was argued that this is an activity that people face in their everyday activities. Background participant information about age, sex, and ethnicity are recorded for demographic purposes. The words have an average of 2.37 syllables and there are 64% of the items on the recognition list are distractors.

Analysis

A computer administration and scoring system generates scores for every measure, graphs a learning curve, and provides learning parameters, response errors and interference effects. Raw scores are used for all analyses, ultimately determining how many errors are made in each learning task. The Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test assesses practice effects and Spearman's rho (p) correlation coefficient is conducted to assess test-retest reliability. Primary learning, recall and recognition measures are recorded as well as the more detailed process measures such as errors, contrast scores, and ratio. [2]

It is suggested that a general verbal learning component consistently accounts for about 35-40% of the total variance and consists of total free recall over the five trials of list A, semantic clustering free and cued recall (both short- and long-delays), and recognition hits. A second, "response discrimination" component has also been found in most studies. It accounts for about 8-10% of the variance with loadings from free and cued recall intrusions and recognition false positives. The remaining components, learning strategy (semantic and serial clustering), serial position (primacy and recency) and proactive effect (List B recall) are inconsistent and account for little additional variance.

Applications

The results can give the experimenter considerable information about personalities, different conditions and learning difficulties. For example, an anxious participant may perform poorly on the first trial but improve as the task is repeated. Adults with limited learning capacity may perform well on early trials but reach a plateau where repeated trials do not reflect improved performance, or have inconsistent recall across trials. This can happen if they try and fail with different strategies of learning. Studies have demonstrated that inconsistent recall across trials characterises patients with amnesia caused by frontal lobe pathology.

The test is used clinically to examine patients with different neuropsychological impairments, but has also helped to understand the properties of the test. For example, immediate recall and long-delayed recall were highly correlated (above r=0.80) for normal patients and those with Huntington's disease, but the variables were only correlated at 0.36 for patients with Alzheimer's disease. [13] The finding suggests that the nature of the association between variables is different for different patient populations and thus the validity is different for different patient groups [19]

Validity

It has considerable support in the neuropsychological literature due to its construct validity. The test-retest reliability of the CVLT has demonstrated stability over time in healthy adults. [20] The construct validity makes it a measure of episodic verbal learning and memory supported by a considerable body of research. The temporal stability of the CVLT-II is still essential to determine its usefulness in measuring cognitive change. [21] The retest reliability and practice effects are consisted with those for the original CVLT and other list-learning and memory tasks such as the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT -R). The reliability ranges from 0.68 to 0.94 [22]

Variations

California Verbal Learning Test for Children (CVLT-C)

The CVLT-C [23] is usually administered to children aged 5–16 to evaluate mild to severe learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, intellectual disability and other neurological disorders. It also provides information for the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders. It also assessed recall and recognition. The child will receive a list of 15 words on a day (A) and an inference list on the following day (B). The child is tested on A immediately after list B. After a 20-minute delay, a non-verbal test is administered, followed by tests of long-delay free recall and long-delay cued recall. Afterwards a test is administered to assess the recognition of words that were administered the day before. The results produce several different scores including total recall, learning strategy, serial position effect, learning rate, consistency of item recall, proactive and retroactive interference, and retention over long and short delays. Internal consistency and alpha reliabilities for the test are high (usually >0.80). [24] Validity studies [25] show the test is moderately correlated (0.32-0.4) with the WISC-R vocabulary subtest [26] (Delis, Kramer et al. 2004).

California Verbal Learning Test-II (CVLT-II)

The California Verbal Learning Test-II [27] is an updated version of the original California Verbal learning Test. The original CVLT was normed on a 'reference sample' of 273 nonclinical subjects. The original test had often been criticised as being biased towards individuals of higher education and functioning, as well as reflecting a narrow range of memory performance. The conclusion that was reached was that it provided valuable qualitative information, but it failed to provide normative data [28]

It includes the addition of a forced choice trial to assess level of effort, the inclusion of recall discriminability indices, which takes into account the number of correct words recalled but also take into account words that were not on the original list. The new word list was intended to be easier, with less geographic, cultural and socioeconomic bias. The 'grocery shopping list' has been dropped in favour of an empirically-driven word list composed of words from four unrelated semantic categories. A nine-word short form has also been introduced to improve the utility of the test in assessment of patients with severe cognitive dysfunction.

The CVLT-II underwent nationwide standardisation with a final normative reference sample consisting of 1087 individuals in the US. The education level was also included as a stratification variable.

Reliability data for the CVLT-II is mostly good, ranging from 0.80 to 0.96 in a mixed neuro-psychiatric sample. Test-retest reliability was also adequate.

Validity data for the CVLT-II builds on the vast existing clinical validity data on the original CVLT. They demonstrate comparable mean scores and standard deviations, and significant correlations between the tests. The great weakness of the CVLT-II is the lack of clinical data for many new indices, particularly the new forced choice discrimination task. [21]

Similar neuropsychological tests

A number of similar tests are available including:

Related Research Articles

Source amnesia is the inability to remember where, when or how previously learned information has been acquired, while retaining the factual knowledge. This branch of amnesia is associated with the malfunctioning of one's explicit memory. It is likely that the disconnect between having the knowledge and remembering the context in which the knowledge was acquired is due to a dissociation between semantic and episodic memory – an individual retains the semantic knowledge, but lacks the episodic knowledge to indicate the context in which the knowledge was gained.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anomic aphasia</span> Medical condition

Anomic aphasia is a mild, fluent type of aphasia where individuals have word retrieval failures and cannot express the words they want to say. By contrast, anomia is a deficit of expressive language, and a symptom of all forms of aphasia, but patients whose primary deficit is word retrieval are diagnosed with anomic aphasia. Individuals with aphasia who display anomia can often describe an object in detail and maybe even use hand gestures to demonstrate how the object is used, but cannot find the appropriate word to name the object. Patients with anomic aphasia have relatively preserved speech fluency, repetition, comprehension, and grammatical speech.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Neuropsychological test</span> Assess neurological function associated with certain behaviors and brain damage

Neuropsychological tests are specifically designed tasks that are used to measure a psychological function known to be linked to a particular brain structure or pathway. Tests are used for research into brain function and in a clinical setting for the diagnosis of deficits. They usually involve the systematic administration of clearly defined procedures in a formal environment. Neuropsychological tests are typically administered to a single person working with an examiner in a quiet office environment, free from distractions. As such, it can be argued that neuropsychological tests at times offer an estimate of a person's peak level of cognitive performance. Neuropsychological tests are a core component of the process of conducting neuropsychological assessment, along with personal, interpersonal and contextual factors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cognitive neuropsychology</span>

Cognitive neuropsychology is a branch of cognitive psychology that aims to understand how the structure and function of the brain relates to specific psychological processes. Cognitive psychology is the science that looks at how mental processes are responsible for the cognitive abilities to store and produce new memories, produce language, recognize people and objects, as well as our ability to reason and problem solve. Cognitive neuropsychology places a particular emphasis on studying the cognitive effects of brain injury or neurological illness with a view to inferring models of normal cognitive functioning. Evidence is based on case studies of individual brain damaged patients who show deficits in brain areas and from patients who exhibit double dissociations. Double dissociations involve two patients and two tasks. One patient is impaired at one task but normal on the other, while the other patient is normal on the first task and impaired on the other. For example, patient A would be poor at reading printed words while still being normal at understanding spoken words, while the patient B would be normal at understanding written words and be poor at understanding spoken words. Scientists can interpret this information to explain how there is a single cognitive module for word comprehension. From studies like these, researchers infer that different areas of the brain are highly specialised. Cognitive neuropsychology can be distinguished from cognitive neuroscience, which is also interested in brain-damaged patients, but is particularly focused on uncovering the neural mechanisms underlying cognitive processes.

Semantic memory refers to general world knowledge that humans have accumulated throughout their lives. This general knowledge is intertwined in experience and dependent on culture. New concepts are learned by applying knowledge learned from things in the past.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Picture superiority effect</span> Psychological phenomenon

The picture superiority effect refers to the phenomenon in which pictures and images are more likely to be remembered than are words. This effect has been demonstrated in numerous experiments using different methods. It is based on the notion that "human memory is extremely sensitive to the symbolic modality of presentation of event information". Explanations for the picture superiority effect are not concrete and are still being debated, however an evolutionary explanation is that sight has a long history stretching back millions of years and was crucial to survival in the past, whereas reading is a relatively recent invention, and requires specific cognitive processes, such as decoding symbols and linking them to meaning.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Neuropsychological assessment</span> Testing to identify brain impairments, their severity & location

The attempts to derive the links between the damage to specific brain areas and problems in behaviour are known throughout the history for 3 millennia. However, the first systematic neuropsychological assessment and a battery of the behavioural tasks to investigate specific aspects of behavioural regulation was developed by Alexander Luria in 1942-1948. Luria was working with big samples of brain-injured Russian soldiers during and after the second World War. Among many insights from Luria's rehabilitation practice and observations, was the fundamental discovery of the involvement of frontal lobes of the cortex in plasticity, initiation, planning and organization of behaviour. His Go/no-go task, which was one of the tasks screening for the frontal lobe damage, "count by 7", hands-clutching, clock-drawing task, drawing of repeatitive patterns, word associations and categories recall and others became standard components of neuropsychological assessment and mental status screening. Considering the originality and multiplicity of neuropsychological components offered by Alexander Luria, he is recognized as a father of neuropsychological assessment. Alexander Luria's neuropsychological battery was adapted in the United States in the form of Luria-Nebraska neuropsychological battery in 1970s. Then the tasks used in this battery were borrowed in more modern neuropsychological batteries and in the Mini–mental state examination test for screening of demenia.

Prospective memory is a form of memory that involves remembering to perform a planned action or recall a planned intention at some future point in time. Prospective memory tasks are common in daily life and range from the relatively simple to extreme life-or-death situations. Examples of simple tasks include remembering to put the toothpaste cap back on, remembering to reply to an email, or remembering to return a rented movie. Examples of highly important situations include a patient remembering to take medication or a pilot remembering to perform specific safety procedures during a flight.

In neurology, semantic dementia (SD), also known as semantic variant primary progressive aphasia (svPPA), is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by loss of semantic memory in both the verbal and non-verbal domains. However, the most common presenting symptoms are in the verbal domain. Semantic dementia is a disorder of semantic memory that causes patients to lose the ability to match words or images to their meanings. However, it is fairly rare for patients with semantic dementia to develop category specific impairments, though there have been documented cases of it occurring. Typically, a more generalized semantic impairment results from dimmed semantic representations in the brain.

The Benton Visual Retention Test is an individually administered test for people aged from eight years to adulthood that measures visual perception and visual memory. It can also be used to help identify possible learning disabilities among other conditions that might affect an individual's memory. The individual examined is shown ten designs, one at a time, and asked to reproduce each one as exactly as possible on plain paper from memory. The test is untimed, and the results are professionally scored by form, shape, pattern, and arrangement on the paper.

A verbal fluency test is a kind of psychological test in which a participant is asked to produce as many words as possible from a category in a given time. This category can be semantic, including objects such as animals or fruits, or phonemic, including words beginning with a specified letter, such as p, for example. The semantic fluency test is sometimes described as the category fluency test or simply as "freelisting", while letter fluency is also referred to as phonemic test fluency. The Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) is the most employed phonemic variant. Although the most common performance measure is the total number of words, other analyses such as number of repetitions, number and length of clusters of words from the same semantic or phonemic subcategory, or number of switches to other categories can be carried out.

Elizabeth Kerr Warrington FRS is a British neuropsychologist specialised in the study of dementia. She holds a PhD in Psychology visual processing and is now an emeritus professor of clinical neuropsychology at the University College London. She formerly worked as the Head of the Department of Neuropsychology at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery where she is also a member of the Dementia Research Centre. She was made a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1986.

The Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB), originally developed at the University of Cambridge in the 1980s but now provided in a commercial capacity by Cambridge Cognition, is a computer-based cognitive assessment system consisting of a battery of neuropsychological tests, administered to subjects using a touch screen computer. The CANTAB tests were co-invented by Professor Trevor Robbins and Professor Barbara Sahakian. The 25 tests in CANTAB examine various areas of cognitive function, including:

Retrospective memory is the memory of people, words, and events encountered or experienced in the past. It includes all other types of memory including episodic, semantic and procedural. It can be either implicit or explicit. In contrast, prospective memory involves remembering something or remembering to do something after a delay, such as buying groceries on the way home from work. However, it is very closely linked to retrospective memory, since certain aspects of retrospective memory are required for prospective memory.

The Luria–Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB) is a standardized test that identifies neuropsychological deficiencies by measuring functioning on fourteen scales. It evaluates learning, experience, and cognitive skills. The test was created by Charles Golden in 1981 and based on previous work by Alexander Luria that emphasizes a qualitative instead of quantitative approach. The original, adult version is for use with ages fifteen and over, while the Luria–Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery for Children (LNNB-C) can be used with ages eight to twelve; both tests take two to three hours to administer. The LNNB has 269 items divided among fourteen scales, which are motor, rhythm, tactile, visual, receptive speech, expressive speech, writing, reading, arithmetic, memory, intellectual processes, pathognomonic, left hemisphere, and right hemisphere. The test is graded on scales that are correlated to regions of the brain to help identify which region may be damaged. The Luria–Nebraska has been found to be reliable and valid; it is comparable in this sense to other neuropsychological tests in its ability to differentiate between brain damage and mental illness. The test is used to diagnose and determine the nature of cognitive impairment, including the location of the brain damage, to understand the patient's brain structure and abilities, to pinpoint causes of behavior, and to help plan treatment.

In psychology, confabulation is a memory error consisting of the production of fabricated, distorted, or misinterpreted memories about oneself or the world. It is generally associated with certain types of brain damage or a specific subset of dementias. While still an area of ongoing research, the basal forebrain is implicated in the phenomenon of confabulation. People who confabulate present with incorrect memories ranging from subtle inaccuracies to surreal fabrications, and may include confusion or distortion in the temporal framing of memories. In general, they are very confident about their recollections, even when challenged with contradictory evidence.

The Delis–Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) is a neuropsychological test used to measure a variety of verbal and nonverbal executive functions for both children and adults. This assessment was developed over the span of a decade by Dean Delis, Edith Kaplan, and Joel Kramer, and it was published in 2001. The D-KEFS comprises nine tests that were designed to stand alone. Therefore, there are no aggregate measures or composite scores for an examinee's performance. A vast majority of these tests are modified, pre-existing measures ; however, some of these measures are new indices of executive functions.

The Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) is a neuropsychological assessment tool used to provide a measure of premorbid intelligence, the degree of Intellectual function prior to the onset of illness or disease.

The relationship between autism and memory, specifically memory functions in relation to autism spectrum disorder (ASD), is an ongoing topic of research. ASD is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterised by social communication and interaction impairments, along with restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior. In this article, the word autism is used to refer to the whole range of conditions on the autism spectrum, which are not uncommon.

Semantic amnesia is a type of amnesia that affects semantic memory and is primarily manifested through difficulties with language use and acquisition, recall of facts and general knowledge. A patient with semantic amnesia would have damage to the temporal lobe.

References

  1. 1 2 Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E., & Ober, B. A. (1987). CVLT, California Verbal Learning Test: Adult Version: Manual. Psychological Corporation.
  2. 1 2 Elwood, R. W. (1995). The California Verbal Learning Test: psychometric characteristics and clinical application. Neuropsychology Review, 5(3), 173–201.
  3. ↑ Elwood, R. W. (1995). The California Verbal Learning Test: psychometric characteristics and clinical application. Neuropsychology Review, 5(3), 173-201.
  4. ↑ Cullum, C. M., Filley, C. M., & Kozora, E. (1995). Episodic memory function in advanced aging and early Alzheimer's disease. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 1(01), 100–103.
  5. ↑ Novack, T. A., Kofoed, B. A., & Crossno, B. (1995). Sequential performance on the California Verbal Learning Test following traumatic brain injury. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 9(1), 38–43.
  6. ↑ Curtiss, G., Vanderploeg, R. D., Spencer, J., & Salazar, A. M. (2001). Patterns of verbal learning and memory in traumatic brain injury. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 7(05), 574–585.
  7. ↑ Sweet, J. J., Wolfe, P., Sattlberger, E., Numan, B., Rosenfeld, J. P., Clingerman, S., & Nies, K. J. (2000). Further investigation of traumatic brain injury versus insufficient effort with the California Verbal Learning Test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15(2), 105–113.
  8. 1 2 Alexander, M. P., Stuss, D. T., & Fansabedian, N. (2003). California Verbal Learning Test: performance by patients with focal frontal and non-frontal lesions. Brain, 126(6), 1493–1503.
  9. ↑ Simon, E., Leach, L., Winocur, G., & Moscovitch, M. (1994). Intact primary memory in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: Indices from the California Verbal Learning Test. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 16(3), 414–422.
  10. ↑ Beck, I. R., Gagneux-Zurbriggen, A., Berres, M., Taylor, K. I., & Monsch, A. U. (2012). Comparison of verbal episodic memory measures: Consortium to establish a registry for alzheimer's disease-neuropsychological assessment battery (CERAD-NAB) versus California verbal learning test (CVLT). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 27(5), 510–519.
  11. ↑ Davies, K. G., Bell, B. D., Bush, A. J., & Wyler, A. R. (1998). Prediction of verbal memory loss in individuals after anterior temporal lobectomy. Epilepsia, 39(8), 820–828.
  12. ↑ van Geldorp, B., Bergmann, H. C., Robertson, J., Wester, A. J., & Kessels, R. P. C. (2012). The interaction of working memory performance and episodic memory formation in patients with Korsakoff's amnesia. Brain Research, 1433, 98–103.
  13. 1 2 Fine, E. M., Delis, D. C., Wetter, S. R., Jacobson, M. W., Hamilton, J. M., Peavy, G., … Bondi, M. W. (2008). Identifying the "source" of recognition memory deficits in patients with Huntington's disease or Alzheimer's disease: Evidence from the CVLT-II. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 30(4), 463–470.
  14. ↑ Wolfe, N., Linn, R., Babikian, V. L., Knoefel, J. E., & Albert, M. L. (1990). Frontal systems impairment following multiple lacunar infarcts. Archives of Neurology, 47(2), 129–132.
  15. ↑ Welte, P. O. (1993). Indices of verbal learning and memory deficits after right hemisphere stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 74(6), 631–636.
  16. ↑ Hermann, B. P., Wyler, A. R., Richey, E. T., & Rea, J. M. (1987). Memory function and verbal learning ability in patients with complex partial seizures of temporal lobe origin. Epilepsia, 28(5), 547–554.
  17. ↑ Paulsen, J. S., Heaton, R. K., Sadek, J. R., Perry, W., Delis, D. C., Braff, D., … Jeste, D. V. (1995). The nature of learning and memory impairments in schizophrenia. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 1(01), 88–99.
  18. ↑ Kaplan, R. F., Meadows, M.-E., Vincent, L. C., Logigian, E. L., & Steere, A. C. (1992). Memory impairment and depression in patients with Lyme encephalopathy Comparison with fibromyalgia and nonpsychotically depressed patients. Neurology, 42(7), 1263.
  19. ↑ Massman, P. J., Delis, D. C., Butters, N., Levin, B. E., & Salmon, D. P. (1990). Are all subcortical dementias alike?: Verbal learning and memory in Parkinson's and Huntington's disease patients. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 12(5), 729–744.
  20. ↑ Delis, D. C., Freeland, J., Kramer, J. H., & Kaplan, E. (1988). Integrating clinical assessment with cognitive neuroscience: construct validation of the California Verbal Learning Test. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 56(1), 123.
  21. 1 2 Jacobs, M. L., & Donders, J. (2007). Criterion validity of the California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) after traumatic brain injury. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology : The Official Journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 22(2), 143–9.
  22. ↑ Paolo, A. M., Tröster, A. I., & Ryan, J. J. (1997). Test–retest stability of the California Verbal Learning Test in older persons. Neuropsychology, 11(4), 613.
  23. ↑ Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E., & Ober, B. A. (1994). CVLT-C: California Verbal Learning Test.
  24. ↑ Mottram, L., & Donders, J. (2005). Construct validity of the California Verbal Learning Test--Children's Version (CVLT-C) after pediatric traumatic brain injury. Psychological assessment, 17(2), 212.
  25. ↑ Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E., & Holdnack, J. (2004). Reliability and validity of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System: an update. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 10(02), 301–303.
  26. ↑ Wechsler, D., Kaplan, E., Fein, D., Kramer, J., Morris, R., Delis, D., & Maerlender, A. (2004). WISC-IV: Wechsler intelligence scale for children.
  27. ↑ Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E., & Ober, B. A. (2000). Manual for the California Verbal Learning Test, (CVLT-II). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
  28. ↑ Woods, S. P., Delis, D. C., Scott, J. C., Kramer, J. H., & Holdnack, J. A. (2006). The California Verbal Learning Test–second edition: test-retest reliability, practice effects, and reliable change indices for the standard and alternate forms. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21(5), 413-420.
  29. ↑ Schmidt, M. (1996). Rey auditory verbal learning test: a handbook (p. 1996). Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
  30. ↑ Randolph, C., Tierney, M. C., Mohr, E., & Chase, T. N. (1998). The Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS): preliminary clinical validity. Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology, 20(3), 310-319.
  31. ↑ Benedict, R. H. B., Schretlen, D., Groninger, L., & Brandt, J. (1998). Hopkins Verbal Learning Test–Revised: Normative data and analysis of inter-form and test-retest reliability. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 12(1), 43–55.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.