60 young and middle-aged patients (age 20 to 52 yr.) with generalized and chronic brain damage were individually matched for age, social class, education, and occupational history with normal control subjects with no history of brain damage. Both groups were given a battery of cognitive tests which included Clement's Digit Code test, Memory-for-Designs, Trail Making, the Spiral Aftereffect, Elithorn's mazes, Mill Hill vocabulary, Progressive Matrices, and the Synonym test. The discriminative efficiency of each measure was examined individually and in combination using discriminant function analysis. The most efficient individual discriminator was the Digit Code. When this was combined with the Trail Making Part B, correct over-all classification was 80%. No other addition improved discrimination significantly. Thus a battery of tests taking 10 min. to administer was as effective as the larger battery which took more than 2 hr. The gradient of test scores with age was examined cross-sectionally for each measure. For most tests, gradients were larger for the brain-damaged than for the control group.
References
1.
AftanasM. S., & RoyceJ. R.A factor analysis of brain damage tests administered to normal subjects with factor score comparisons across ages. Multivar. Behav. Res., 1969, 4, 459–481.
2.
BarnesG. W., & LucasG. J.Cerebral dysfunction vs. psychogenesis in Halstead-Reitan tests. J. nerv. ment. Dis., 1974, 158, 50–60.
3.
BirrenJ. E.ButlerR. N.GreenhouseS. W.SokoloffL., & YarrowM. R. (Eds.) Human aging: A biological and behavioral study. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Dept. of Health, Education & Welfare, Public Health Service, National Institute of Mental Health, 1963.
4.
ClémentF.Une épreuve rapide de mesure de l'efficience intellectuelle. Rev. psychol. Appl., 1963, 13, 1–15.
5.
DaviesA. D. M.The perceptual maze test in a normal population. Percept, mot. Skills, 1965, 20, 287–293.
6.
DaviesA. D. M.Measures of mental deterioration in aging and brain damage. In ChownS. M. & RiegelK. F. (Eds.). Psychological functioning in the normal aging and senile aged. Basel: Karger, 1968. Pp. 78–90.
7.
DaviesM. G.The performance of the linear discriminant function in two variables. Brit. J. math. stat. Psychol., 1970, 23, 165–176.
8.
DaviesM. G.The expectation of Mahalanobis' generalized distance. Ann. Inst. Stat. Math., 1972, 24, 111–125.
9.
ElithornA.A preliminary report on a perceptual maze test sensitive to brain damage. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 1955, 18, 287.
10.
FisherR. A.The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann. Eugen., 1936, 7, 179–188.
11.
FouldsG. A.Variations in the intellectual activities of adults. Amer. J. Psychol., 1949, 62, 238–246.
12.
GrahamF. K., & KendallB. S.Memory for designs test: Revised general manual. Percept, mot. Skills, 1960, 11, 147–188 (Monogr. Suppl. 2-V11)
13.
HallenbeckC. E.Evidence for a multiple process view of mental deterioration. J. Gerontol., 1964, 19, 357–363.
14.
HeronA., & ChownS.Age and function. London: Churchill, 1967.
15.
KendrickD. C.ParboosinghR. C., & PostF.A synonym learning test for use with elderly psychiatric subjects: A validation study. Brit. J. soc. clin. Psychol., 1965, 4, 63–71.
16.
KløveM.Validation studies in adult clinical neuropsychology. In ReitanR. M. & DavisonL. A. (Eds.), Clinical neuropsychology: Current status and applications. Washington, D.C.: Winston, 1974. Pp. 211–235.
17.
KormanM., & BlumbergS.Comparative efficiency of some tests of cerebral damage. J. consult. Psychol., 1963, 27, 303–309.
18.
MahalanobisP. C.On the generalized distance in statistics. Proc. Nat. Inst. Sci. India, 1936, 2, 49–55.
19.
ParsonsO. A.MaslowH. I.MorrisF., & DennyJ. P.Trail Making test performance in relation to certain experimenter, test and subject variables. Percept. mot. Skills, 1964, 19, 199–206.
20.
ParsonsO. A., & PrigatanoG. P.Methodological considerations in clinical neuropsychological research.). consult, clin. Psychol., 1978, 46, 608–619.
21.
PriceA. C., & DeablerH. L.Diagnosis of organicity by means of spiral after-effect. J. consult. Psychol., 1955, 19, 299–302.
22.
RaoC. R.Advanced statistical methods in biometric research. New York: Wiley, 1952.
23.
ReedH. B. C., & ReitanR. M.A comparison of the effects of the normal aging process with the effects of organic brain damage on adaptive abilities. J. Gerontol., 1963, 18, 177–179.
24.
ReitanR. M.Validity of the Trail Making test as an indicator of organic brain damage. Percept, mot. Skills, 1958, 8, 271–276.
25.
ReitanR. M.The effects of brain lesions on adaptive abilities in human beings. Indianapolis: Author, 1959.
26.
ReitanR. M.The comparative psychological significance of aging in groups with and without organic brain damage. In TibbitsC. & DonahueW. (Eds.), Social and psychological aspects of aging. New York: Columbia Univer. Press, 1962. Pp. 880–887.
27.
ReitanR. M.Psychological changes associated with aging and with cerebral damage. Mayo Clinic Proc, 1967, 42, 653–673.
28.
ReitanR. M., & DavisonL. A. (Eds.) Clinical neuropsychology: Current status and applications. Washington, D.C.: Winston, 1974.
29.
ReinhardtH. E.Statistical theory and clinical practice in predicting rare phenomena. Psychol. Rep., 1979, 45, 468–470.
30.
TomlinsonB. E.Morphological brain changes in non-demented old people. In Van PraggH. M. & KalverboerA. F. (Eds.), Ageing of the central nervous system: Biological and psychological aspects. Haarlem: De Erven F. Bohn N.V., 1972. Pp. 38–57.
31.
WheelerL.BurkeC. J., & ReitanR. M.An application of discriminant functions to the problem of predicting brain damage using behavioral variables. Percept. mot. Skills, 1963, 16, 417–440. (Monogr. Suppl. 4-V16)
32.
WilliamsH. L.LubinA., & GiesekingC. F.Direct measurement of cognitive deficit in brain injury. J. consult. Psychol., 1959, 23, 300–305.
