Open AccessPotential Impact of Age- and Education-Corrected Scores on HRNB Score Patterns in Participants With Focal Brain Injury
Author(s) -
Charles J. Golden,
A. van den Broek
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
archives of clinical neuropsychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.909
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 1873-5843
pISSN - 0887-6177
DOI - 10.1016/s0887-6177(98)00006-7
Subject(s) - raw score , neuropsychology , equivalence (formal languages) , scoring system , psychology , test score , neuropsychological assessment , neuropsychological test , standard score , raw data , medicine , statistics , cognition , mathematics , psychiatry , standardized test , surgery , mathematics education , discrete mathematics
Heaton, Grant, and Matthews (1991) presented an alternate scoring system for the Halstead–Reitan Neuropsychological Battery (HRNB) using age-, education-, and gender-corrected T scores to replace the raw score system traditionally employed with the test. This study addressed the impact of using this system on the score patterns generated by the HRNB in 64 clients with localized injuries to one of four quadrants of the brain. Results showed that the raw scores show more overall impairment than do the T scores, but overall the systems are statistically equal in their ability to separate the localized groups. The patterns of differences among the systems also differ. Although these findings suggest overall equivalence of the systems, they also show that each may have strengths that will show up in different analyses. A process of using both scoring systems for their own unique information is advocated as most appropriate at the current time until additional research addresses the questions raised in this study and elsewhere