Abstract
A critical review of the 24-step procedure of Miller and Rohling's (in press) proposed standardization of clinician's use of neuropsychological assessment batteries is presented. Each step is examined for statistical sources of invalidity. It was concluded that parts of the procedure are quite vulnerable to between-battery variability that cannot be easily estimated or controlled, leading to significant errors in analysis and classification. A second fatal flaw is the failure to distinguish in the procedures between standard error measurement and standard error of the estimate in calculations in several steps. The purpose of the process remains viable, however, and is an important contribution toward the improvement of clinical diagnosis.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Cattell, R. B. (1978). The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis in the Behavioral and Life Sciences, Plenum, New York.
Kaufman, A. S. (1978). Intelligent Testing With the WISC-R, Wiley Interscience, New York.
Kaufman, A. S. (1994). Intelligent Testing With the WISC-III, Wiley Interscience, New York.
Miller. L. S., and Rohling, M. L. (in press). A statistical interpretive method for neuropsychological tests. Neuropsychol. Rev.
Pintner, R. (1923). Intelligence Testing: Methods and Results, Henry Holt, New York.
Reynolds, C. R, and Kamphaus, R. W. (1992). Behavior Assessment System for Children, American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN.
Reynolds, C. R, and Kamphaus, R. W. (2002). Clinician's Guide to the Behavior Assessment System for Children, Guilford, New York.
Witmer, L. (1902). Analytical Psychology, Ginn & Company, Boston.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Willson, V.L., Reynolds, C.R. A Critique of Miller and Rohling's Statistical Interpretive Method for Neuropsychological Test Data. Neuropsychol Rev 14, 177–181 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NERV.0000048184.45472.7a
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NERV.0000048184.45472.7a