Warrington Recognition Memory Test

2012 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Recognition Memory Test ◽  
Warrington Recognition Memory Test

The utility of the warrington recognition memory test for temporal lobe epilepsy: Pre- and postoperative results

1995 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce P. Hermann ◽  
Bryan Connell ◽  
William B. Barr ◽  
Allen R. Wyler
Keyword(s):  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Temporal Lobe Epilepsy ◽  
Temporal Lobe ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Postoperative Results ◽  
Recognition Memory Test ◽  
Warrington Recognition Memory Test

Internal Consistency of the Warrington Recognition Memory Test

1998 ◽  
Vol 86 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1320-1322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Malina ◽  
Dana A. Bowers ◽  
Scott R. Millis ◽  
Sara Uekert
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Internal Consistency Reliability ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Recognition Memory Test ◽  
Warrington Recognition Memory Test

The Recognition Memory Test is frequently used to assess memory; however, one of the commonly cited limitations is a lack of data on reliability. The current study was undertaken to estimate the internal consistency reliability of the test with a sample of 72 persons with traumatic brain injury. Acceptable estimates of internal consistency for both subtests were obtained.

Performance validity assessment using response time on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Sarah D. Patrick ◽  
Lisa J. Rapport ◽  
Robert J. Kanser ◽  
Robin A. Hanks ◽  
Jesse R. Bashem
Keyword(s):  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Response Time ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Performance Validity ◽  
Recognition Memory Test ◽  
Validity Assessment ◽  
Performance Validity Assessment ◽  
Warrington Recognition Memory Test

scholarly journals A-215 The Utility of the First Ten Items of the Warrington Recognition Memory Test as a Performance Validity Test

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 1010-1010
Author(s):  
Fett J ◽  
Cottingham M
Keyword(s):  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Cutoff Score ◽  
Performance Validity ◽  
Recognition Memory Test ◽  
Hospital Patients ◽  
Diagnosis Of Dementia ◽  
Neuropsychological Evaluations ◽  
Warrington Recognition Memory Test ◽  
Male Frequency

Abstract Objective Performance validity tests (PVTs) are widely used in neuropsychological evaluations but are often lengthy and time-consuming. Therefore, development of more efficient PVTs is critical. The current study evaluated the utility of the first 10 items of the Warrington Recognition Memory Test (RMT) as an indicator of performance validity. Methods This study utilized archival data from 134 veterans presenting for a clinical neuropsychological evaluation at a southeastern Veterans Affairs hospital. Patients were deemed “credible” if they failed less than two unrelated PVT measures, had a FSIQ > 70, and did not carry a diagnosis of dementia. This resulted in 103 patients in the credible group [Mage = 49.76(11.67); Meducation = 14.09(2.88); 77.67% Male]. The 31 patients in the non-credible group met Slick et al. (1999) criteria[Mage = 45.13(11.18); Meducation = 12.77(2.53); 87.10% Male]. Frequency counts were run to determine sensitivity and specificity values at established cut-offs and to create new cut-offs for the first 10 items. Results Using established cut-off scores, the RMT total score had adequate specificity (91%) with a corresponding sensitivity of 84%, and the RMT time score had adequate specificity (93%) with a corresponding sensitivity of 34%. When examining the first 10 items on the RMT, a score of < 8 resulted in 96% specificity and 61% sensitivity. Conclusions The established cutoffs for the RMT performed well in this patient sample. Additionally, using a cutoff score of ≤ 8 on the first 10 items of the RMT may be a useful indicator of probable failure on the RMT, significantly reducing test administration time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document